B034.C 


UC-NRLF 


B    E    flOfi    ISS 


/^ 

^ 

(c 

.^•.^ 

^mi^ 


THE  KEY 


TO 


1  me  Christianity: 


BSINQ 


A    SERIES    OF    LETTERS 

ADDRESSED    TO 

Rev.  J.  D.  BLACKWELL  D  D 

BT 

Rev.  M.  O'KEEFR, 

Paetor  of  the  Catholic  Church,  Korfolk,   Va., 
PENDING   A   DISCUSSION   OX   THE 

"BIBLE  AS  A  DIVINE  REVELATION. 


•■I....d»..M,ev..h.o.p.,.«M..„,,^,„„,„,.,.,,,^„„^^^_,^__ 


compel  me  thereto."— Sr. 


AuaufTun. 


Pf^TLADELPIITA  • 


1874. 


LOAN  STACK 


Entered,  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1874,  by 

MATTHEW   O'KEEFE,   NORFOLK,   VA., 

in  the  Office  of  the  Librarian  of  Congress,  at  Washington,  D.  C. 


TO 

ft.  |nt.  ^mn  mUn,  i-  g. 

BISHOP   OF   RICHMOND. 

THE    YOUNG    PRELATE, 

WHOSE   ZEAL   IN   THE   SERVICE   OF   GOD, 

WHOSE   GENTLE  AND   AMIABLE   CHARACTER, 

WHOSE   ADMITTED   TALENTS   AND   ELOQUENCE, 

AND 

WHOSE   UNFEIGNED   PIETY  AND  GENUINE   HUMILITY, 

HAVE  EVER   CHALLENGED   MY  RESPECT   AND  ADMIRATION, 

THESE   PAGES 

ARE  AFFECTIONATELY  DEDICATED, 

BY 

HIS  HUMBLE  SERVANT  AND  FRIEND  IN   CHRIST, 

M.  O'K. 


(ifi) 


INTRODUCTION 


The  following  letters  are  almost  self-explanatory.  They  embody  a 
discussion  which  covered  a  period  of  nearly  four  months,  in  the  columns 
of  the  Norfolk  Virginian,  between  a  highly  esteemed  clergyman  of  the 
Methodist  se6l  of  Protestantism  and  the  author,  occasioned  by  letters 
addressed  by  Dr.  Blackwell  to  an  assumed  Catholic,  in  the  columns  of 
the  Richjnojid  Christian  Advocate,  a  journal  published  in  the  interests 
of  the  Methodists,  the  tenor  of  which  I  felt  aggrieved  by,  as  the  senior 
priest  residing  in  Norfolk. 

The  letters  containing  the  discussion  were  read  with  much  eagerness 
by  thousands  in  this  sedlion  of  the  country,  as  they  made  their  appearance 
in  the  columns  of  the  Virginian,  and  it  is  in  deference  to  the  expressed 
wish  of  numbers.  Catholic  and  non-Catholic,  to  whom  I  may  add  also 
the  pubhc  press,  that  I  have  consented  to  give  them  a  connedled  and 
permanent  form. 

I  have  been  the  more  induced  to  do  this,  from  the  fafl,  that  of  all  the 
discussions  that  have  come  under  my  observation,  this  is  the  only  one 
that  has  from  the  first,  occupied,  and  at  the  close,  held  the  same  new 
ground,  viz :  I  entered  on  the  discussion  with  the  consent  of  my  Rev- 
erend opponent,  by  occupying  Protestant  territory,  and  made  it  the  bat- 
tle field  during  the  whole  period  of  the  confli6l,  notwithstanding  the 
ceaseless  efforts  of  my  Reverend  opponent  to  allure  me  therefrom. 

Whilst  thus  engaged,  I  despoiled  my  vanquished  foe  of  the  arms 
wherewith  he  had  hitherto  made  what  seemed  to  him  such  a  successful 
war  on  the  Catholic  Church,  and  I  demonstrated  to  the  world,  as  these 
letters  will  abundantly  testify,  that  Protestantism  has  not  an  inch  of  su- 
pernatural ground  whereon  to  maintain  itself,  and  that  there  is  no  other 
resource  left  to  the  bona  fide  believer  in  the  Divinity  of  Jesus  Christ, 
than  the  acceptance  of  the  Catholic  Church,  or,  reje(fling  Jesus  Christ 
and  therefore  Christianity,  the  adoption  of  Rationalism.  This  new 
ground  chosen  by  me  at  the  outset  of  the  discussion,  appeared  to  me,  for 
a  long  time,  to  be  the  shortest  and  most  effedlive  mode  of  arriving  at  the 
conclusion,  which  to  the  honest  and  unprejudiced  inquirer,  is  inevitable, 
viz :  that  the  biblical  system  cannot  bear  the  test  of  logical  analysis ; 
hence,  when  the  occasion  presented  itself,  I  availed  myself  of  it  to  prove 
whether  I  had  conjecflured  rightly,  and  the  result  has  more  than  con- 
vinced me  of  the  corredlness  of  the  assumption. 

(V) 


VI  ,  INTRODUCTION. 

My  Reverend  opponent  confesses  that  he  had  received  substantial  aid 
from  able  auxiliaries,  but  unavailingly,  as  the  sequel  proved. 

The  pages  to  which  the  reader  is  introduced  will  abundantly  explain 
why  all  the  letters  of  my  Reverend  opponent  are  not  to  be  found  in  this 
book.  It  suffices  for  me  to  state  now,  that  I  have  carefully  and  scru- 
pulously colledled  all  the  proofs  furnished  by  my  Reverend  opponent 
pertaining  to  the  question,  which  was  alone  the  legitimate  subject  of  de- 
bate, and  had  he  been  able  to  present  more,  I  should  have  reserved  a  place 
for  them,  and  in  the  order  presented  ;  but  inasmuch  as  despairing  of  suc- 
cess, he  filled  his  letters  with  extraneous  matter,  I  could  not  consent  to 
afford  space  in  this  work,  for  the  introduction  of  that,  against  which  I  con- 
stantly protested  during  the  discussion,  and  which  had  no  bearing  on 
the  only  legitimate  question  permissible,  viz  :  the  proofs  for  the  inspira- 
tion of  the  Bible,  on  Protestant  grounds. 

I  also  beg  leave  to  append  to  this  collecTtion,  some  letters  written  by 
me  early  last  Fall,  in  the  columns  of  the  Norfolk  Virginian,  over  the 
nom  de  plu7ne  of  "Light,"  which  will,  doubtless,  convince  the  hon- 
est inquirer  after  truth,  that  the  keeping  of  the  first  day  of  the  week,  is, 
on  Biblical  principles,  a  pradlical  and  totally  unjustifiable  infraction  of 
the  most  emphatic  of  all  God's  commands,  "  Remember  the  Sabbath 
Day,  to  keep  it  holy."  My  reader  will  charitably  overlook  any  undue 
warmth  of  expression  which  they  may  detedl,  either  in  the  use  of  terms 
or  in  the  plainness  of  language,  they  will  kindly  bear  in  mind  that,  as 
my  letters  followed  my  Reverend  opponent's  in  the  next  day's  issue  of 
the  Virginian,  I  had  not  the  necessary  leisure  to  calmly  seledl  expres- 
sions wherewith  to  clothe  my  ideas  as  a  writer  would,  whose  time  is 
entirely  at  his  disposal. 

Should  one  soul,  through  divine  grace  and  the  reading  of  this  work 
be  brought  to  the  knowledge  of  the  truth,  the  author  is  more  than  re- 
compensed for  what  he  has  done,  and  the  only  tribute  that  he  will  exacTl 
is  a  prayer  for  himself;  for  this  hope  alone,  nurtured  by  the  solicitation 
of  friends  and  strangers,  could  have  induced  him  to  forego  the  seclusion, 
which,  for  twenty-two  years,  he  has  advisedly  maintained  in  the  routine 
duties  of  the  Pastorate,  and  to  appear  before  the  world,  a  target  at  which 
the  enemies  of  truth  may,  with  impunity,  aim  their  envenomed  shafts. 

In  conclusion,  although  not  conscious  of  any  expressions  against  faith 
or  morals  in  the  following  pages,  I  unreservedly  submit  myself  and  them 
to  the  judgment  of  the  authorities  of  the  Holy  Roman  Catholic  Church, 
and  especially  of  him  to  whoip,  in  the  person  of  Peter,  the  Saviour  had 
said,  "  I  have  prayed  for  thee,  Peter,  that  thy  faith  fail  not ;"  and  whom 
I,  en  toto  corde,  have  ever  recognized  as  the  Divinely  appointed  infalli- 
ble teacher  of  mankind. 

M.  O'K. 


THE  KEY  TO  TRUE  CHRISTIANITY. 


NORFOLK,  JULY  10,  187?. 
REV.  J.  D.  BLACKWELL,  D.D. 

Dear  Sir  :  A  friend  has  placed  in  my  hands  several  copies 
of  the  Christian  Advocate^  in  which,  in  a  series  of  letters  addressed 
to  "a  Catholic,"  in  reply  to  some  questions  purporting  to 
be  put  by  him,  you  profess  to  enlighten  him  and  "  the  rest  of 
manlcind,"  on  Rome  and  her  dogmas,  and  in  which  you  honor 
my  reverend  confreres  and  myself,  residing  in  Norfolk,  with  a 
special  notice. 

You  also  propose  to  "show  up"  the  absurdity  of  the  Catholic 
doctrine  of  the  "  Real  Presence,"  in  reply  to  Father  Damon's 
sermon,  as  published  in  the  Irish  World — how  successfully,  the 
sequel  will  prove. 

As  the  senior  priest  resident  in  Norfolk,  I  will  respectfully  call 
your  attention  to  three  or  four  points  in  your  communications, 
that  seem  to  be  deserving  of  notice  on  your  part : 

1st.  Throughout  your  letter  you  address  the  "unknown 
friend,  "  as  a  Catholic — this  I  respectfully  deny,  and  call  on  your 
"highly  esteemed  friend"  and  yourself  to  prove  the  assertion, 
whilst  I  at  the  same  time  aver  that  your  "highly  esteemed 
friend"  was  well  aware  that  the  writer  of  the  questions  was  not 
a  "  Romanist,"  which  fact  he  either  communicated  to  you  or  he 
did  not ;  if  he  did  so,  I  cannot  reconcile  with  good  faith,  the 
position  of  addressing  as  a  Catholic,  through  the  public  prints,  a 
man  whom  you  know  not  to  be  so,  unless  you  felt  like  borrowing 
for  the  occasion  a  maxim  falsely  attributed  to  the  Jesuits,  viz  :  the 
end  justifies  the  means — if,  on  the  other  hand,  your  "highly  es- 
teemed friend  "  left  you  in  ignorance  of  the  fact,  then  the  infer- 

7 


g  THE    KEY  TO    TKUE   CHRISTIANITY. 

ence  is  that  he  was  guilty  of  a  most  un-Pythian  discourtesy 
towards  a  brother  sir  knight,  and  justly  deserves  to  be  stripped 
of  his  spurs. 

2d.  I  would  call  your  attention  to  the  following  extract  from 
your  third  letter:  "Evidently,  my  friend,  Jesus  came  as  a  light, 
a  teacher  to  the  world,  and  when  he  required  his  doctrines 
TO  BE  WRITTEN  FOR  ALL  AGES,"  &c.  Now  do  me  the  favor 
to  say  where  in  the  Apostolic  writings  you  made  the  above  dis- 
covery ?  I  had  always  thought  that  Jesus  neither  left  a  line  of 
writing,  nor  ordered  a  line  to  be  written.  But  not  being  a  D.D., 
and  only  a  simple  priest  of  the  Catholic  Church,  from  whom 
my  church  has  kept  the  bible,  as  she  did  from  my  ascetic  con- 
frere Martin  Luther,  my  ignorance  is  excusable.  Please  extend 
your  charity  to  a  poor  benighted  priest  on  this  point,  furnishing 
chapter  and  verse. 

3d.  In  the  same  third  letter  you  say  :  "We  do  not  require  our 
people  to  '  accept  our  simple  word,  *  we  make  every  effort  to 
supply  them  with  the  Word  of  God,"  &c.  Now,  as  you  say 
you  fear  not  the  truth,  and  are,  I  am  sure,  in  your  zeal,  "always 
ready  to  furnish  reasons  for  the  hope  that  is  in  you,"  and,  as  you 
enjoy  blessings  which  we  benighted  Papists  do  not,  living  as  you 
do  in  the  full  blaze  of  Gospel  light  and  liberty,  which  we  are 
alas  !  deprived  of,  do  me  the  favor  in  your  charity,  to  prove  that 
you  possess  the  "  Word  of  God,"  and  "  do  not  require  me  to 
take  your  simple  word  for  it."  You  see  my  church  has  always 
taught  me  that  the  New  Testament,  at  least,  cannot  be  proved  to 
be  the  "  Word  of  God,"  without  the  aid  of  an  unerring  witness, 
and  she  arrogantly  assumes  that  that  witness  is  herself 

Now  I  hereby  pledge  myself  that  if  you  convince  me  to  the 
contrary,  you  will  have  performed — I  was  about  to  say — a  mir- 
acle— but  your  modesty  has  already  made  you  disclaim  that  Prot- 
estantism makes  any  such  claim  ;  but  you  will  have  accomplished 
what  I  have  never  yet  seen  done,  and  you  will  have  impressed, 
not  a  bogus  Catholic  "  manufactured  to  order,"  but  a  genuine 
Catholic  and  a  priest  to  boot,  with  the  conviction  that  you  pos- 
sess powers  of  mind  I  had  never  before  accorded  to  any  man, 
and  you  will  have  laid  a  foundation  for  the  biblical  theory  which 
your  predecessors  in  the  Protestant  ministry  have  for  300  years 


THE    KEY    TO    TRUE    CHRISTIANITY.  9 

labored  to  achieve,  but  in  vain.  When  you  will  have  convinced 
me  of  the  fact  that  the  New  Testament  is  the  ''  Word  of  God  " 
and  will  "  not  require  me  to  take  your  simple  word  for  it,"  as 
you  say,  I  will  pledge  myself  to  discuss  with  you,  as  with  one 
who  has  the  right  to  quote  the  Bible  as  "  the  Word  of  God," 
the  doctrine  of  the  real  presence,  miracles,  or  any  other  dogma 
of  the  Catholic  Church. 

4th.  In  your  third  letter  I  find  the  following  words  which 
require  explanation :.  "  We  stand  up  sabbath  after  sabbath,  and 
call  upon  our  people  to  obey  the  Gospel  of  Christ,  to  read  His 
word  and  try  our  teaching  by  the  law  and  testimony  of  that 
word."  Now  whenever  I  get  a  chance  of  reading  "  the  word  " 
like  my  illustrious  brother,  Martin  Luther  (without  the  ecstacies 
he  experienced,  however,  when  he  for  the  first  time,  discovered 
the  treasure  amongst  the  dusty  tomes  in  the  library)  I  avail  my- 
self of  it,  but  I  have  never  yet  discovered  in  the  "  Word  of 
God  "  that  the  Sabbath  was  the  first  day  of  the  week,  but,  on 
the  contrary,  in  every  instance  the  Sabbath,  from  the  beginning 
to  the  end,  is  the  day  God  rested  from  his  work  ;  beginning  on 
Sunday,  He  rested  on  Saturday,  which  the  Scripture  calls  the 
Sabbath  on  that  account,  and  which  the  Fourth  Commandment 
of  God  requires  you  to  keep. 

Will  you  now  inform  me  when  you  did  so  ?  During  my 
twenty  years'  residence  in  Norfolk  I  have  never  known  any 
biblical  denomination  of  Christians  to  have  so  done,  but  I  have 
always  known  them  to  choose  another  day.  Pray  enlighten  my 
ignorance  as  regards  "  the  Word  of  God,"  and  let  me  have  some 
positive  precept  of  God  repealing  the  original  command  delivered 
in  more  emphatic  language  than  any  of  the  other  nine,  "  Remem- 
ber THE  Sabbath  Day,"  &c.  Unless  you  do  this,  I  must  con- 
clude that  "  your  people,"  as  you  call  them,  are  after  all,  taking 
your  simple  word,  and  have  never  yet  tried  our  (your)  teachings 
by  the  law  and  testimony  of  that  (God's)  word  which  I  em- 
phatically declare  to  be  flagrantly  violated  hj  you  every  week  of 
your  life. 

In  conclusion,  as  you  have  gratuitously  invited  the  controversy, 
by  flippantly  referring  to  me  as  one  of  the  priests  of  Norfolk,  I 
now  beg  leave  to  propose  that  you  will  place  yourself  under  ad- 


2Q  THE    KEY   TO    TRUE    CHRISTIANITY. 

ditlonal  obligations  to  the  Editor  of  the  Christian  Advocate  and 
ask  him  to  kindly  permit  me  the  use  of  his  columns  alternately 
with  yourself  in  order  to  discuss  the  above  highly  important 
questions.  Or  should  it  suit  you  better,  let  us  make  a  joint  re- 
quest of  one  of  our  city  papers  here  for  that  end.  You  and  I 
are  recognized  as  instructors  in  Christianity  in  this  city,  and  it  is 
only  fitting  that  our  fellow-citizens  should,  through  the  local  press, 
receive  many  additional  rays  of  Christian  light  which  the  con- 
troversy will,  doubtless,  elucidate,  if  conducted  under  the  eyes 
of  our  fellow-citizens. 

You  say  in  your  first  letter,  "  I  fear  not  the  light ; "  nor  do  I ; 
and  for  my  part  I  tender  you  the  assurances  of  the  most  refined 
courtesy  in  my  communications. 

Bespectfully, 

M.  O'KEEFE, 
Koman  Catholic  Pastor  of  Norfolk. 


NORFOLK,  JULY  14,  1873. 
REV.  MATTHEW  O'KEEFE. 

Dear  Sir  :  I  have  read  your  communication  addressed  to  me 
through  the  columns  of  the  Norfolk  Virginian^  of  the  lOth  inst. 
In  reply,  I  have  several  things  to  say. 

I  am  writing  a  series  of  articles,  the  purpose  and  plan  of 
which  were  stated  in  my  first  letter,  published  in  the  Richmond 
Christian  Advocate,  You  will  excuse  me  if  I  cannot  see  that  the 
questions  you  propound  are  of  so  much  more  moment  than  those 
now  under  discussion,  that  I  must  turn  aside  to  answ^er  your  inquir- 
ies. Let  us  see  if  we  can  estimate  the  weight  and  worth  of  your 
questions.  You  ask  first  for  proof  that  the  gentleman  addressed 
is  a  Catholic.  The  friend,  who  handed  me  the  letter  stated 
that  he  was  not  entirely  a  Catholic,  but  more  of  a  Catholic 
than  anything  else  ;  and  his  letter,  now  in  my  possession,  declares 
him  a  believer  in  those  doctrines  which  distinguish  the  Catholic 
from  other  churches.  On  the  evidence  of  this  letter,  a  jury 
would  convict  him  of  Romanism.  But  why  this  question  t 
The  only  point  of  interest  to  you  or  to  me  is,  whether  the  doc- 


THE   KEY   TO   TRUE   CHRISTIANITY.  21 

tri'nes  suggested  by  this  letter  and  discussed  by  me  are  held  by 
the  church  of  Rome.  Never  mind  about  the  man,  look  to  the 
points  discussed.  Again  you  ask  me  to  prove  to  you  that 
Jesus  required  his  doctrine  to  be  written,  and  also  that  the 
bible  and  especially  the  new  testament,  is  the  word  of  God.  If 
these  are  not  trivial  questions,  when  the  points  for  which  proof 
is  demanded  are  admitted  by  universal  Christendom,  both  papal 
and  protestant,  then  I  confess  my  ignorance.  We  both  admit 
that  the  new  testament  was  written  according  to  the  purpose 
and  promptings  of  our  Lord,  and  you  surely  know  that  God 
can  make  known  His  will  in  some  other  way  than  by  direct  and 
written  command.  Prove  to  you  that  the  new  testament  is  the 
word  of  God  !  I  have  and  use,  as  you  know,  your  own  bible, 
endorsed  by  the  Pope  and  by  the  archbishops  and  bishops  of  this 
country,  and  you  would  have  me  turn  aside  from  my  discussion 
and  waste  time  and  strength  in  proving  what  you  and  I  and  all 
Christendom  admit.  Can  you  be  serious  ?  Does  not  this  look 
like  an  endeavor  to  divert  attention  from  the  issue.  Again,  your 
question  about  the  Sabbath  is  of  the  same  character,  so  far  as 
my  argument  is  concerned.  I  have  often  seen  school  boys  in 
debate  pass  over  the  main  points  in  an  argument  and  ring  the 
changes  on  some  ill-chosen  word  or  ungrammatical  sentence. 
You  know  very  well  that  the  word  Sabbath  had  nothing  what- 
ever to  do  with  my  argument.  Had  it  been  written,  "  We  stand 
up  week  after  week,"  instead  of  "  Sabbath  after  Sabbath,"  the 
sense  would  have  been  the  same.  Why  propound  these  ques- 
tions in  connection  with  my  arguments  ?  I  presume  I  know 
your  design  ;  but  if  you  wish  to  discuss  with  me  the  question  of 
our  dependence  on  the  church  of  Rome,  for  knowledge  on  the 
points  you  suggest,  I  will  be  most  happy  to  do  so  at  the 
PROPER  TIME.  For  the  present  please  remember,  I  am  writing 
to  another  gentleman,  and  on  other  subjects. 

As  to  your  remark  that  I  "  flippantly  "  refer  to  you  as  one  of 
the  priests  of  Norfolk,  I  do  not  know  why  you  say  "  flippantly." 
I  did  not,  of  course,  name  you,  and  in  reasoning  with  one  who 
claims  that  your  Church,  equally  with  the  first  disciples,  has  the 
power  to  perform  miracles,  I  was  simply  earnest,  and  not  flip- 
pant, in  referring  to  the  priests  of  Norfolk,  as  those  who  could 


22  THE   KEY  TO   TRUE   CHRISTIANITY. 

most  conveniently  remove  my  incredulity.  This  is  the  only 
reference  you  can  find  to  yourself,  and  I  am  happy  to  say  that 
in  using  the  phrase  "  Priests  of  Norfolk "  I  had  no  unkind 
feeling  or  ungenerous  purpose  whatever.  It  was  used  simply 
and  solely  as  part  of  an  argument. 

You  say,  ''  I  tender  you  the  assurances  of  the  most  refined 
courtesy  in  my  communications."  Let  us  understand  one 
another.  I  fear  our  views  of  courtesy  do  not  agree.  Address- 
ing me,  you  write :  "  You  profess  to  enlighten  him  and  '  the 
rest  of  mankind  '  on  Rome,"  &c  ;  and  again  you  say  :  "  You 
also  propose  to  'show  up'  the  Catholic  doctrine,"  &c.,  putting 
the  phrases  "rest  of  mankind "  and  "show  up"  in  quotation 
marks.  The  foundation  for  all  this  are  these  simple  sentences. 
I  say  to  my  unknown  correspondent  :  "  I  will  cheerfully  no- 
tice the  points  to  which  my  attention  is  directed,"  and  to  the 
editor  of  the  Advocate^  I  say,  "  and  will  also  give  a  brief  review 
of  the  discourse  of  reverend  Mr.  Damon."  Please  notice  the 
difference  of  impression  which  these  sentences  would  make — 
the  one  my  own  language,  the  other  your  representation  of  what 
T  propose,  and  a  representation  so  put  as  to  lead,  I  think,  to  the 
supposition  that  you  have  my  very  phrases.  The  words  of  the 
letter  are  unpretending,  simply  a  promise  to  "  notice"  and  to  "  re- 
view," without  even  a  suggestion  whether  favorably  or  unfavorably. 
Your  language  representing  my  position  I  will  not  characterize, 
but  say  only  that  Its  hectoring  and  self-sufficient  cast  would 
make,  a  very  unfavorable  impression  on  a  cultivated  mind.  Such 
representations  In  a  letter  addressed  to  a  gentleman  do  not  appear 
to  me  as  courteous.  Nor  do  your  remarks  about  the  "  bogus 
Catholic,  manufactured  to  order,"  and  the  manifest  endeavor  to 
create  the  Impression  that  something  dark  and  foul  was  intended, 
in  addressing  the  gentleman — unknown  to  me — as  a  Catholic. 
I  have  stated  all  I  know  of  him,  and  every  candid  mind  will  see 
that  it  Is  a  matter  of  no  moment  whatever  in  my  discussion 
whether  he  Is  a  Catholic  or  not.  As  you  refer  to  the  maxim, 
the  "  end  justifies  the  means,"  I  will  remark,  In  passing,  that  if 
the  writings  of  your  own  high  authorities  can  be  relied  on,  I 
will,  at  the  proper  time,  show,  that  not  only  Is  the  charge  not 
false  in  reference  to  the  Jesuits,  but  that  many  others  In  your 


THE    KEY    TO    TRUE    CHRISTIANITY.  J3 

church  besides  the  Jesuits,  endorse  that  maxim.  Why  that 
frequent  reference  to  your  ignorance  and  to  my  great  knowledge? 
Is  that  intended  to  be  courteous  ?  You  scarcely  suppose  me  so 
stupid  as  not  to  recognize  it  as  irony.  Why,  that  irony  ?  Am 
I  boasting  of  my  knowledge,  or  arrogating  all  wisdom  to  myself? 
You  find  me  giving,  in  a  plain,  straight-forward  way,  my  views 
on  questions  propounded,  boasting  nothing,  promising  nothing, 
but  simply  expressing  my  opinions.  Is  that  an  impertinence  ? 
Is  the  expression  of  one's  views  freely  and  fearlessly  in  this 
Christian  land,  an  arrogance  for  which  he  must  be  twitted  by  his 
brother  as  a  Solomon  ;  sneered  at  in  irony  and  biting  sarcasm,  as 
professing  to  be  wise  above  what  is  written. 

I  am  willing  to  believe  you  intended  no  offence  in  all  this,  but 
it  is  difficult  to  conceive  of  myself  as  writing  in  such  a  strain 
without  intending  marked  discourtesy. 

You  say,  "  When  you  will  have  convinced  me  that  the  bible 
is  the  word  of  God,  I  will  pledge  myself  to  discuss  with  you  as 
with  one  who  has  the  right  to  quote  the  word  of  God,"  &c.  If 
you  mean  to  deny  to  me  the  right  to  use  the  Scripture  as  the 
word  of  God,  I  reply  that,  as  a  child  of  God,  I  am  your  ecjual 
in  all  respects,  as  to  rights,  and  claim  to  possess,  not  as  the 
grant  of  Pope  or  church,  but  as  a  gift  directly  from  our  common 
Father,  the  right  not  only  to  read  His  will,  writtento  Hischildren, 
but  to  receive  thankfully  every  perfect  gift  "coming  down  from 
the  Father  of  light."  Please  remember  these  are  not  the  Dark 
Ages,  and  I  am  not  a  papist.  If  you  mean  only  that  I  have  no 
right  as  a  logician  to  use  the  scripture,  as  God's  word,  then  the 
case  is  altered;  but  on  this  point  I  will  join  issue  with  you  at 
the  proper  time. 

After  all  this,  I  will  say  what  hundreds  of  gentlemen  who 
knoW'  me  will  confirm,  that  I  have  not  one  particle  of  unkind- 
ness  towards  yourself,  your  church,  or  any  human  being.  Many 
have  heard  me  express  a  deep  interest  in  the  Jews.  Now,  if  I 
should  write  a  series  of  letters,  trying  to  show,  from  their  own 
scriptures,  that  Jesus  was  the  Messiah,  and  seeking  to  lead  them 
to  the  blessings  of  the  Gospel  of  Jesus  Christ,  would  this  prove 
my  bitterness  and  hatred  of  them?  Shortly  after  my  arrival  in 
this  city,  I  heard  you  in  the  home  of  one  of  my  own  members, 


24  THE   KEY  TO   TRUE   CHRISTIANITY. 

say  that  the  water  in  the  holy  baptism  had  cleansed  the  soul  of 
the  deceased  before  you  from  all  original  and  actual  sins,  and 
that  he  was  safe  in  the  bosom  of  God.  Now,  does  it  show 
bitterness  in  one,  who  believes  that  he  is  set  for  the  defence  of 
the  truth,  to  endeavor  to  teach  his  fellow-citizens  that  not  water, 
but  the  blood  of  Jesus  Christ,  cleanseth  from  all  sin  ;  that  the 
power  of  the  spirit  and  not  the  ministrations  of  man,  purijfies 
and  prepares  for  heaven.  Am  I  therefore,  your  enemy  because 
I  tell  you  the  truth  ? 

As  to  the  challenge,  I  have  made  none,  but  was  only  discuss- 
ing questions  which  are  legitimately  before  the  world.  I,  how- 
ever, accept  your  proposition  and  will  obtain,  if  possible,  the 
consent  of  the  editor  of  the  Richmond  Christian  Advocate^  to 
publish  your  articles  in  his  paper,  on  condition  that  you  secure 
for  me  a  similar  privilege  in  the  Catholic  paper  which  has  the 
largest  circulation  in  this  community. 

Respectfully, 

J.  D.  BLACKWELL. 

N.  B.— If  the  manner  in  which  I  agree  to  meet  your  propo- 
sition does  not  suit  you,  I  will  discuss  orally  with  you,  at  such 
time  and  place,  in  this  city,  as  we  may  agree  upon,  the  follow- 
ing :  The  right  of  each  one  to  receive  the  scriptures  as  the  word 
of  God  and  interpret  them  for  himself.  2d,  The  doctrine  of 
auricular  confession  in  connection  with  penance  and  priestly  ab- 
solution, as  held  by  the  church  of  Rome.  3d.  The  doctrine  of 
transubstantiatlon.  4th.  The  claim  of  the  church  of  Rome,  or 
of  the  Roman  Catholic  church,  to  be  one  in  doctrine  and  in 
spirit  with  the  Apostolic  church.  J.  D.  B. 


NORFOLK,  JULY    17,  1873. 
BEV.  J.   D.  BLACKWELL,   D.  D. 

Dear  Sir  •  I  commence  my  reply  to  yours  of  the  14th, 
with  the  grave  words  of  Don  Quixote,  who,  addressing  his 
faithful  squire,  Sancho  Panza,  utters  the  following  immortal 
phrase  :  "  Fortune  disposes  our  affairs  better  than  we  ourselves 
could  have  desired  :  look  yonder,  friend  Sancho  Panza,  where 
thou  mayest  discover  somewhat    more    than    thirty  monstrous 


THE   KEY  TO   TRUE   CHRISTIANITY.  ^5 

giants,  whom  I  intend  to  encounter  and  slay,"  &c.  "  What 
giants  ?"  said  Sancho  Panza.  "  Look  sir,  those  which  appear 
yonder,  are  not  giants  but  wind-mills,"  &c. 

The  inimitable  Cervantes  proceeds,  then,  to  describe  one  of 
the  most  amusing  pictures  ever  drawn,  and  when  he  presents  to 
our  imagination  the  gallant  knight  with  buckler  covered,  lance 
in  the  rest ;  the  good  steed  Rosinante  spurred  to  the  charge  ;  the 
burying  of  the  lance  in  the  side  of  the  wind-mill ;  the  hoisting  of 
the  redoubtable  knight  of  La  Mancha,  steed  and  all,  in  the  sails 
of  the  wind-mill,  we  can  hardly  decide  which  to  admire  the  more, 
the  absurdity  of  the  attack  and  its  disastrous  results,  or  the  word 
painting,  descriptive  of  the  encounter. 

But  we  realize,  reverend  sir,  in  our  day,  the  dream  of  Cervan- 
tes ;  our  gallant  knight  hears,  too,  from  his  honest  brother  and  sir 
knight,  "  he  is  not  a  Catholic."  Yet  our  modern  Quixote 
WILL  attack,  and  like  his  prototype — collapse.  The  only  differ- 
ence observable  between  the  two  pictures  consists  in  the  fact  that 
the  knight  of  La  Mancha,  after  his  mishap,  recognized  his  mistake, 
whereas,  our  modern  knight  is  loath  to  admit  his,  and  is  ready 
to  call  together  a  jury  of  his  countrymen  to  decide  whether  the 
object  is  a  veritable  Catholic  or  not.  It  is  well  that  he  excul- 
pates his  brother  knight,  admitting  that  he  told  him  that  the 
writer  ''  was  not  altogether  a  Catholic  ;"  but  in  so  doing  he  only 
criminates  himself  the  more  :  for  thus  the  question  stands — in 
order  to  gratify  his  yearning  to  attack  the  Catholic  Church,  it 
will  give  eclat  to  the  attack  to  dub  the  interrogator  a  Catholic 
(there  is  method  in  our  madness),  although  it  is  well  known 
amongst  the  friends  of  the  writer  that  he  does  not  even  believe 
in  a  divine  revelation,  and  notwithstanding  that  his  "  highly 
esteemed  friend,"  like  Sancho  Panza,  cried  out  in  almost  the 
words  of  the  faithful  Squire :  "  Did  not  I  warn  you  to  have  a 
care  of  what  you  did,  for  that  they  were  nothing  but  wind-mills ;" 
it  is  useless  to  remonstrate — he  declares — with  Don  Quixote, 
"  it  is  lawful  war  (and  every  ruse  is  lawful  in  war,)  and  doing 
God  good  service  to  remove  so  wicked  a  generation  from  off 
the  face  of  the  earth ;"  in  other  words,  to  attack  them  when 
found  or  not  found.  But"  here  the  similitude  to  La  Mancha's 
knight  ceases,  and  our  clerical  champion,   Proteus-like,  assumes 


23  THE   KEY  TO   TRUE   CHRISTIANITY. 

a  new  role — the  role  of  Jesuit,  according  to  his  own  estimate 
of  the  Jesuit  character.  Alas  !  my  friend,  it  is  too  true — from 
the  high  pinnacle  of  D.D.  in  the  Methodist  Church,  to  the  adop- 
tion for  his  motto  :  "  the  end  justifies  the  means,  "  so  truly  as 
cribed  to  those  horrible  Jesuits.  What  a  fall !  and  yet  how  truly 
does  the  poet  say  :  ^^  facilis  descensus  Averni.^^  Dr.  Blackwell 
playing  Jesuit !  We  shall  see.  The  reverend  doctor's  letter  in- 
forms me  that  he  is  now  so  occupied  writing  a  series  of  letters  to  his 
"  manufactured  "  Catholic,  so  husy  preparing  for  another  tilt  at 
his  ecclesiastical  wind-mill,  that  he  will  not  be  disturbed  by  the 
realities  of  life,  even  though  "  the  Greeks  be  at  his  own  doors;" 
he  must  reserve  "  his  strength  and  time  "  for  Papist  attacks  through 
the  columns  of  a  Methodist  paper,  as  unconscious  of  the  attack 
as  the  wind-mill  was  of  the  onslaught  of  Don  Quixote.  I  tap 
the  reverend  doctor  on  the  shoulder  and  tell  him  that  a  papist  in 
Norfolk  takes  up  the  gage — that  I  am  ready  for  the  combat ;  and 
what  is  the  reply?  I  am  too  busy  now  ;  "at  the  proper  time," 
repeated  three  or  four  times  in  his  letter — which,  literally  inter- 
preted, means  never.  Ah,  dear  sir,  the  veil  is  too  transparent 
not  to  be  seen  through — the  attempt  at  so-called  Jesuitry  bears 
too  evidently  the  traces  of  a  ''tyro*'  not  to  be  easily  detected. 
Again  you  say  with  an  imperturbable  coolness  "  never  mind 
about  the  man,"  &c.  Is  this,  I  ask,  the  language  of  the  man  who 
teaches  Christian  morality?  Who  gave  you  the  right  to  impose 
on  thousands  of  credulous  readers,  that  the  man  you  were  ad- 
dressing was  what  you  knew  him  not  to  be,  and  what  you  were 
told  he  was  not,  and  to  make  the  matter  worse  you  say  :  "  never 
mind  the  man."  If  this  be  not  the  doctrine  that  "the  end  jus- 
tifies the  means"  illustrated  in  your  person,  then  I  never  yet  un- 
derstood it.  I  regret  I  am  thus  obliged  to  unmask  this  attempt 
at  what  you  would  innocently  denominate  a  "pious  fraud,"  but 
which  any  man  not  a  professor  of  religion,  nay  even  "a  Jesuit," 
would  blush  to  be  guilty  of.     So  much  for  point  ist. 

2d.  When  I  called  your  attention  to  your  own  words  :  "  and 
when  He  required  His  doctrine  to  be  written  for  all  ages,"  &c., 
I  asked  you  to  inform  me  where  in  the  apostolic  writings  you 
found  such  a  command,  requesting  chapter  and  verse?  How  did 
you  make  good  that  assertion  ?     How  was  I  answered  ?     1  refer 


THE    KEY  TO    TRUE    CHRISTIANITY.  "[J 

my  readers  to  your  reply  to  that  question  and  ask  whether  it  be 
not  worthy  of  any  so-called  Jesuit  ?  How  much  more  honest 
and  upright  would  it  have  been  to  admit  that  you  had  incautiously 
used  that  expression  and  begged  leave  to  recall  it — "  humanum 
est  errare^''  "it  is  human  to  err."  Had  I  so  blundered  in  my 
ignorance  of  the  "  Word  of  God  "  I  would  manfully  accept  the 
mortification  and  acknowledge  my  error. 

3d.  Before  I  animadvert  on  your  reply  to  my  third  point,  I 
must  premise,  that  I  do  not  desire  to  occupy  a  false  position  in  this 
discussion  ;  I  am  not  the  aggressor.  Soon  after  your  advent  to 
this  city  you  published  in  our  city  papers  announcements  of  lec- 
tures to  be  delivered  by  you  on  Romanism.  You  constituted 
yourself  the  Boanerges  of  Protestantism  here,  as-  against  the 
Roman  Church,  and  in  the  words  of  the  prophet,  we  gratefully 
declare  "  Misericordia  Domini  quia  non  sumus  consumpti^^  '*-it 
is  owing  to  the  mercy  of  God  that  we  were  not  annihilated." 
This  aggression  continued  more  or  less  until  it  was  formally  re- 
newed in  our  recent  letters — accident  placed  me  in  possession  of 
three  of  them,  wherein  my  reverend  confreres  and  myself  are  fre- 
quently invited  by  you  to  amuse  you  by  the  performance  of 
miracles  (Herod  expected  the  same  favor  of  Christ,)  in  a  style 
entirely  unwarranted  by  our  relations  to  each  other.  I  used  the 
word  "  flippantly  "  in  that  connection,  and  I  did  so  advisedly — 
a  stronger  word — "  insolently" — for  example  would  have  been 
authorized  ;  and  here  I  will  advert  to  your  complaint  of  biting 
sarcasm,  irony,  want  of  courtesy,  &c.,  whilst  in  the  same  breath 
almost,  you  bid  me  "  remember  that  these  are  not  the  dark  ages, 
and  that  you  are  not  a  papist."  People  in  glass  houses  ought 
not  to  throw  stones."  Please  let  me  know  whether  the  man  who 
uses  that  language  in  such  connection  has  any  right  to  complain 
of  biting  sarcasm,  &c.  I  assure  you  I  don't  complain.  I'm  used 
to  it,  as  my  countrymen  are  to  hanging,  and  in  that  consists  all 
the  difference  between  you  and  myself. 

But  let  me  tell  you  that  a  wicked  thought  flashed  across  my 
mind  while  reading  that  admonition,  and  I  will  confess  it  even 
to  you,  though  I  assure  you  I  did  not  consent  to  it.  It  was, 
that  surely  the  ages  referred  to  were  dark  enough  without  intro- 
ducing some  one  who,  naturally  or  otherwise,  would  not  be  able  to 

2 


18 


THE    KEY  TO  TRUE    CHRISTIANITY. 


shed  one  ray  of  light  on  their  gloominess.  And  again,  as  to 
your  not  being  a  papist,  let  me  assure  you  that  old  mother 
church  loses  very  little  in  such  case,  inasmuch  as  your  accession 
to  the  "  fold  "  would  entail  on  some  poor  priest  the  irksome 
task  of  hearing  a  life-long  confession,  administering  conditional 
baptism,  receiving  your  profession  of  faith,  pronouncing  absolu- 
tion, &c.  Should  I  be  the  fortunate  (?)  one  to  do  so,  I  promise 
the  absolution  without  charging  a  cent ;  but  please  say  nothing 
about  it.  But  to  resume,  since  you  have  been  the  aggressor 
from  the  beginning,  don't  blame  me,  if,  in  vindication  of  my  re- 
ligion, I  require  that  you,  inasmuch  as  Othello's  occupation's 
gone — the  ecclesiastical  wind-mill  no  longer  exists  and  there  be- 
ing no  longer  any  "  Catholic  "  to  address  in  the  columns  of  the 
Advocate,,  accept  my  invitation  to  discuss  the  foundations  of  our 
respective  systems  of  religion  through  the  columns  of  the 
Virginian. 

We  are  agreed  as  to  the  existence  of  a  revelation — of  its 
completion  in  and  by  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ — but  after  this  comes 
a  divergence.  My  faith  teaches  me  that  the  Son  of  God  estab- 
lished a  church  on  earth  for  the  purpose  of  teaching  mankind ; 
that  He  made  promises  to  that  church  which  will  ever  preserve 
her  from  teaching  falsehood,  and  that  a  Record  written  some 
years  after  her  institution  by  men  conversant  with  the  facts  of 
her  existence  and  the  promises  made  her,  authentic,  genuine  and 
truthful  exists  corroborative  of  the  above  facts.  This  record  is 
to  me,  thus  far,  only  a  human  work — as  such,  it  testifies  to  the 
existence  of  the  teacher  organized  by  Jesus  Christ ;  to  the  pledges 
that  this  teacher  can  never  err  in  her  teachings  ;  to  the  command 
giv^n  me  by  Jesus  Christ  to  hear  her  under  the  most  awful  pen- 
alties— which  command  I  obey,  because  it  is  my  God  who  com- 
mands ;  and  when  she  tells  me  that  I  must  accept  that  record 
(hitherto  regarded  by  me  as  a  human  document)  as  of  Divine  in- 
spiration, I  cheerfully  hear  the  voice  of  God  speaking  through 
her  and  joyfully  accept  the  gift ;  thus  the  church  instituted  by 
Jesus  Christ,  years  before  a  word  of  the  Christian  dispensation 
was  committed  to  writing,  gives  me  the  *'  word  of  God  "  and 
pledges  her  faith  that  it  is  "  His."  You  have  now  an  outline  of 
my  faith  in  the  divinity  of  the   New  Testament.     What  I  have 


THE    KEY  TO    TIIUE    CHRISTIANITY.  29 

done  with  so  much  facility,  you  can,  I  presume,  do  as  easily. 
Come,  reverend  sir,  let  not  your  modesty  interfere!  You  have 
no  idea  of  the  solicitude  with  which  the  forthcoming  analysis  of 
your  faith  is  awaited  by  your  fellow-citizens.  You  have  said 
"I  fear  not  the  light,"  and  if  ever  the  time  existed  that  >ou 
"  hide  not  your  light  under  a  bushel,"  now  Is  the  time.  Perhaps 
you  fear  to  commence  (your  letter  gives  every  evidence  of  such 
a  feeling),  but  hundreds  of  our  veterans  residing  here  will  tell 
you  how  terribly  they  felt,  (brave  men  though  they  were  as  ever 
stood  in  the  front  of  battle)  under  the  first  fire.  Your  indispo- 
sition to  join  issue  on  this  question  will  soon  pass  away.  Aude  /;?- 
cipere^  dare  to  begin,  and  very  soon  like  our  gallant  veterans,  if 
not  victor,  you  will  at  least  have  the  consolation  to  know  that 
you  made  a  good  fight  Bonum  certamen  certavi^  said  St.  Paul, 
"  I  have  fought  a  good  fight."  Don't  waste  your  time  and 
strength  on  the  bogus  Richmond  Catholic  and  his  unconscious 
co-believers.  Heretofore  you  were  like  the  boys  playing  soldier, 
dealing  your  death  blows  from  the  pulpit  and  through  the  press 
on  imaginary  papists,  declaring  with  the  knight  of  La  Mancha, 
"that  it  Is  lawful  war  and  doing  God  good  service  to  remove  so 
wicked  a  generation  from  the  face  of  the  earth."  You  can  re- 
sume your  attacks  on  the  ecclesiastic  wind-mill  "  at  the  proper 
time."  Remember,  you  said  In  your's  to  me  "  you  believe  you 
were  sent  for  the  defence  of  the  truth."  Don't  be  recreant  to 
this  duty.  Act  up  to  this  belief.  Gratify  your  fellow-citizens 
by  entering  boldly  on  "  the  defence  of  the  truth."  But  before 
you  begin,  let  me  admonish  you  to  take  nothing  for  granted. 
Let  every  link  In  your  chain  of  reasoning  be  of  such  texture  and 
so  firmly  welded  Into  Its  predecessor,  that  when  you  will  have 
concluded  your  argument  "  for  the  defence  of  the  truth,"  your 
fellow-citizens  with  myself  will  admiringly  pronounce  It  match- 
less in  structure,  and  proof  against  the  attacks  of  wilfully-blind 
unbelievers  and  thick-headed  papists.  When  this  will  have  been 
accomplished,  we  will  address  ourselves  to  the  Sabbath  question 
and  the  other  questions  referred  to  by  you  In  the  N.  B.  at  the 
end  of  your  letter. 

Respectfully,  &c., 

M.  O'KEEFE. 


I 


OQ  THE   KEY  TO   TKUE   CHKISTIANITY. 

NORFOLK,   JULY  29,  1873. 
REV.  J.  D.  BLACKWELL,  D.  D. 

Dear  Sir  :  I  have  just  read  your  communication  and  hasten 
to  comply  with  your  wishes. 

Allow  me,  before  so  doing,  to  tender  you  my  hearty  congrat- 
ulations on  the  abandonment  of  any  further  attacks  on  the  ec- 
clesiastical wind-mill,  and  myself  on  being  the  humble  instru- 
ment of  recalling  so  valorous  a  knight  from  ideal  conquests  to  a 
combat  with  a  flesh  and  blood  foeman,  equally,  to  say  the  least, 
worthy  of  his  steel. 

You  appear  surprised  that  I  do  not  accept  your  proposition,  &c. 

Now,  reverend  sir,  when  you  tell  me  "■  that  at  the  proper 
TIME  "you  will  be  most  "happy  to  discuss."  &c.,  and  in  the 
same  breath  you  say  "  foe  the  present  "  please  remember  I 
am  writing  to  another  gentleman  (the  wind-mill),  were  I  to  per- 
severe in  urging  my  invitation,  would  I  not  be  pretty  much 
in  the  same  position  as  poor  Pat  was  when  asked  what  was  the  na- 
ture of  the  gentle  hint  he  got  to  leave,  replied  that  he  was  kicked 
down  stairs  ? 

You  now  offer  me  one  of  three  modes  of  discussion,  viz :  the 
columns  of  the  Christian  Advocate ;  an  oral  discussion  j  or  the 
Virginian, 

I  cannot  see  either  the  possibility  or  utility  of  an  oral  discus- 
sion ;  for  your  letters  furnish  abundantly-convincing  proof  that 
your  mind,  however  naturally  endowed,  has  never  acquired  a 
disciplined  training;  hence  the  impossibility  of  keeping  you  con- 
fined within  the  limits  prescribed  by  the  laws  that  govern  those 
who  have  gone  through  the  curriculum  of  mental  discipline,  and 
as  to  the  utility  of  such  a  medium  (were  it  possible)  I  feel  that 
the  truth  may  be  elicited,  and  the  public  may  judge  far  more 
calmly  of  the  merits  of  the  discussion  through  the  columns  of  a 
newspaper  than  in  any  other  form.  As  to  the  newspaper,  I  re- 
peat what  I  have  already  said  in  my  last,  "accept  my  invitation 
to  discuss  the  foundations  of  our  respective  systems  of  religion 
in  the  columns  of  the  Virginian." 

As  you  give  me  the  choice  of  the  first  subject  to  be  discussed. 
I  choose  the  Bible.     My  reason  for  so  doing,  is  this  :   I  have  an 


THE    KEY  TO    TRUE   CHRISTIANITY. 


21 


idea  that  the  war-cry  of  the  Bible,  and  Bible  only,  without 
note  or  comment,  cannot  be  sustained  ;  hence,  before  I  could 
consent  that  you  quote  it  as  the  "word  of  God,"  (although  per- 
fectly willing  that  you  do  so  as  a  genuine,  truthful  narrative  of 
such  events  as  it  treats  of)  you  will  have  to  prove  your  right  to 
do  so,  as  I  did,  before  you  attack  any  doctrine  of  the  Catholic 
church. 

You  will,  therefore,  proceed  to  show — 

1st.  The  divine  inspiration  of  the  Bible :  or  in  other  words, 
that  it  is  not  a  human  but  divine  production. 

2dly.   You  will  please  establish  your  canon  of  the  Scriptures. 

3dly.  You  will  vindicate  the  right  of  interpreting  what  you 
have  already  proved  to  be  the  word  of  God,  by  private  judgment. 

These  points  being  satisfactorily  demonstrated,  I  am  prepared 
unequivocally  to  admit  your  right  to  the  Scriptures  as  the  '^  word 
of  God,"  and  to  sustain  any  doctrine  of  the  Catholic  church 
which  you  may  feel  disposed  to  assail. 

Respectfully, 

M.  O'KEEFE. 


NORFOLK,  AUGUST   9,  1873. 
REV.  MATTHEW  O'KEEFE. 
*****  *  *  **** 

Dear  Sir  :  I  proceed  to  show  you  briefly  our  method  of 
proving  the  divine  inspiration  of  the  new  testament.  The 
apostles  and  writers  of  the  sacred  books  easily  convinced  the 
candid  of  the  generation  In  which  they  lived,  that  they  were 
truthful  and  were  sent  of  God  to  teach.  This  they  did  by  mir- 
acles. These  may  be  called  the  stamp  of  God  to  the  teachings 
and  writings  of  those  first  christian  teachers.  When  Paul,  per- 
forming numerous  miracles,  proclaimed  that  the  gospel  he  preached 
was  received,  "  not  from  man,  nor  did  I  learn  it  but  by  the  reve- 
lation of  Jesus  Christ,"  Gal.  i,  I2,  the  hearer  must  have  been 
persuaded  that  God  was  with  him,  and  that  he  spake  God's  truth. 
Then  the  doctrine  itself  confirms  this  persuasion.  It  declares 
of  man  what  his  own  heart  affirms  as  true,  that  he  is  guilty  be- 


22  THE   KEY  TO   TRUE   CHRISTIANITY. 

fore  God,  &c.  It  proclaims  a  heavenly  morality,  enjoining  love 
to  God  and  man,  holiness  and  perfect  purity.  Finally,  those  in- 
spired teachers,  as  ail  christian  ministers  of  the  present  day,  gave 
their  hearers  the  demonstration  of  experience.  They  taught 
that  burdened  sinners  coming  to  Christ  by  faith,  w^ould  be  par- 
doned and  experience  the  joys  of  pardon ;  as  the  cases  of  the 
Publican  in  the  Temple,  and  the  vi^oman  vv^ashing  the  feet  of 
Jesus  with  her  tears,  the  Phillipian  jailer,  &c.  Paul,  in  Romans, 
v,  I,  says:  "Therefore  being  justified  by  faith,  let  us  have  peace 
with  God,  through  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ."  This  is  the  blind 
man's  argument:  "Whereas,  I  was  blind,  now  I  see:"  whereas, 
I  was  burdened,  now  I  have  peace  and  joy  of  heart.  And  this 
the  Master  teaches,  John  vii  and  17  :  "If  any  man  will  do  the 
will  of  Him,  he  shall  know  of  the  doctrine  whether  it  be  from 
God,  or  whether  I  speak  from  myself."  Now  when  the  sacred 
writers  penned  the  Gospels  or  Epistles,  there  could  be  no  great 
difficulty  in  making  known  to  that  generation  that  they  had  so 
done.  As  they  were  written  to  edify  the  church,  the  writers 
would  of  course  deposit  each  record  with  some  faithful  chris- 
tians, or  some  one  church,  as  Paul's  letters  to  the  Corinthians 
were  sent  to  the  Corinthian  church,  &c.,  authenticated  as  his. 
Thus  the  whole  new  testament  was  written  and  authenticated  to 
that  generation  as  the  work  of  inspired  men.  But  of  course 
some  part  of  this  record  was  in  one  church  and  some  in  another 
— one  letter  at  Rome,  one  at  Ephesus,  one  at  Philippi,  &c. 
When  all  came  to  be  gathered  up,  there  would  be  questions  as 
to  whether  each  was  of  apostolic  authority,  and  therefore  of  di- 
vine inspiration.  But  these  questions  were  settled  by  human 
testimony,  not  infallible  witnesses — by  such  testimony,  however, 
as  fully  satisfied  the  christians  of  that  age.  Suppose  Paul  lived  in 
this  age,  he  could  convince  this  generation  that  he  wrote  under 
divine  inspiration,  and  we  could  gather  up  the  evidence  of  that 
fact,  and  hand  it  down  successfully  to  after  ages,  without  being 
an  infallible  generation.  Does  it  require  an  infallible  nation  to 
hand  down  to  remote  ages  the  fact  that  George  Washington  was 
the  first  president  of  the  United  States.  You  say  in  your  first 
letter  of  July  loth:  "my  church  has  always  taught  me,  that  the 
new  testament,  at  least  cannot  be  proved  to  be  the  word  of  God, 


THE    KEY    TO    TKUE    CHRISTIANITY.  23 

without  the  aid  of  an  unerring  witness."  Why  so  !  The  old 
testament  was  proved  by  the  Jewish  church  to  be  divinely  given, 
and  was  received  by  the  apostles  as  God's  word  ;  but  surely  that 
church,  which  acting  through  its  highest  judicatory,  presided 
over  by  its  High  Priest,  condemned  Jesus  to  death,  would  scarcely 
be  pronounced  unerring  or  infallible  ;  and  yet  it  handed  down 
successfully  the  proof  of  the  divinity  of  the  old  testament  scrip- 
tures. Human  and  fallible  human  testimony  has  even  been 
deemed  sufficient  to  establish  any  facts.  So  far  from  being  de- 
pendent on  the  church  of  Rome  for  the  proof  of  the  inspiration 
of  the  new  testament,  we  can  show  that  no  such  church  as  the 
present  church  of  Rome  was  in  existence  till  several  centuries 
of  the  christian  era  had  passed  away.  True,  had  there  been  no ' 
people  between  us  and  the  apostolic  age,  the  scriptures  would 
not  have  come  down  to  our  times.  This  is  the  only  sense  in 
which  it  can  be  said  absolutely  that  your  church  or  any  other 
organization  gave  us  the  word  of  God,  and  in  this  sense,  the 
Greek  and  Syriac  churches  place  us  under  as  much  obligation 
as  the  church  of  Rome. 

Take,  now,  my  mode  of  establishing  the  divine  inspiration  of 
the  new  testament — that  the  writers  claimed  inspiration,  demon- 
strated by  miracles,  that  God  sent  them  ;  that  the  generation  to 
whom  they  wrote  gathered  up  the  evidence  and  handed  it  down 
— and  refute  it  if  you  can. 

Take  that  grand  experimental  evidence  to  which  we  have  re- 
ferred, that  believing  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  we  shall  be 
saved,  and  find  joy  and  peace  through  believing.  This  is  to  us 
the  most  joyous  and  satisfactory  of  any  other.  Put  this  evidence 
to  the  test,  my  dear  sir,  and  we  will  yet  see  eye  to  eye. 

In  my  next  I  will,  with  great  pleasure,  consider  the  remaining 
parts  of  your  proposition,  namely :  the  Protestant  canon  of 
scripture,  and  the  right  of  each  christian  to  exercise  his  private 
judgment  in  interpreting  the  word  of  God. 

Respectfully, 

J.  D.  BLACKWELL. 


OA  THE  KEY  TO  TRUE  CHRISTIANITY. 

NORFOLK,  AUGUST   11,  1873. 
REV.  J.   D.  BLACKWELL,   D.  D. 

**Parturiunt  montes,  nascitur  ridiculus  mus." — 

Horace. 

The  mmmtains  labor  -vvith  main  and  might ; 
A  ridiculous  mouse  is  brought  to  light. 

Dear  Sir:  The  overwhelming  mass  of  matter  with  which 
I  was  honored  in  this  morning's  Virginian^  would  have  tried  a 
man  with  less  nerve  than  myself;  but  let  me  assure  you,  that, 
whilst  wading  knee-deep  through  the  shapeless  bank  of  mud, 
which,  for  twelve  days,  you  were  so  industriously  piling  up,  I 
could  not  refrain  from  picturing  to  myself  the  smile  of  self-com- 
placency that  passed  over  your  countenance  on  the  consumma- 
tion of  so  noble  (.?)  a  work. 

The  mode  of  operation  seems  to  me  to  be  a  cross  between 
the  Quixotic  and  so-called  Jesuit  styles,  but  I  regret  that  I 
cannot  accord  to  you  the  palm  of  Prince  of  Sophists  ;  the 
veil  being  too  transparent  to  escape  detection — however,  I  give 
you  all  credit  for  the  Intention. 

Your  conduct  In  this  instance,  can  be  paralleled  only  by  an 
incident  that  occurred  in  my  boyhood  days,  in  a  royal  college  in 
my  native  land. 

A  youth,  otherwise  talented,  but  who  had  a  decided  distaste 
for  mathematics,  was  called  at  the  public  examination,  to  the 
black-board  to  solve  a  question  In  algebra.  His  ignorance  of 
equations  was  as  extensive  as  it  could  well  be  ;  .yet,  counting 
on  the  Ignorance  of  the  titled  visitors  who  were  looking  on 
very  wisely  and  gravely,  the  question  being  presented,  he  started 
to  fill  the  board  with  algebraic  signs,  which,  having  accom- 
plished with  a  knowing  wink  to  his  class-fellows,  he  subjoined 
triumphantly  Q.  E.  D.  He  had  already  received  the  approba- 
tion of  the  titled  visitors,  who,  deceived  by  the  rapidity  of  the 
solution,  took  it  for  granted  that  the  present  subject  was  a 
prodigy.  The  good,  simple  professor,  whose  name  Is  recorded 
amongst  the  best  benefactors  of  the  age  for  his  discoveries,  was, 
for  the  moment,  non-plussed  ;  but  having  examined  for  a  few 
minutes  the  production  on  the  board,  calmly  remarked  :     '^  In- 


THE  KEY  TO  TRUE  CHRISTIANITY.  25 

deed  you  have  not  taken  the  first  step  towards  the  solution  of 
the  question.'*  The  disgust  on  the  part  of  the  board  of  visitors 
for  their  own  exhibition  of  ignorance,  and  for  the  young  man 
whose  brass  had  completely  outwitted  them,  can  be  better  im- 
agined than  described. 

The  counterpart  of  this  incident  we  enjoyed,  reverend  sir, 
in  the  treat  given  us  this  morning  in  the  columns  of  the  Virgi- 
nian. Three  columns  and  a  half  of  matter  are  adroitly  palmed 
off  on  the  reading  community  as  proof  of  the  position  of  the 
writer  ;  and  elevated,  indeed,  must  be  his  estimate  of  their  in- 
telligence, if,  like  the  young  man  above  described,  he  counts  on 
their  being  blinded  by  his  miserable  sophistry.  I  shall  now  pro- 
ceed to  dissect  this  formidable  document.  In  your  last  letter  to 
me,  dated  two  weeks  ago,  reverend  sir,  you  proffered  me  the 
choice  of  a  subject  to  be  discussed  ;  I  hastened  to  meet  your 
wishes,  choosing  the  bible,  to  be  proved  by  you  as  a  divine,  not 
a  human  production,  etc.  In  reply,  I  was  (as  I  anticipated,) 
after  a  twelve  days'  silence,  indulged  with  what?  Not  an 
elaborate  argument  for  the  question  under  discussion,  but  a 
stale  rehash  of  all  kinds  of  odds  and  ends,  a  thousand  times 
already  answered,  utterly  irrelevant  to  the  question  at  issue, 
whilst  a  very  small  portion  of  the  document  was  devoted  to  the 
proofs  of  the  subject  legitimately  under  discussion.  All  this 
was  ingeniously  introduced  for  the  purpose  of  diverting  public 
attention  from  the  weakness  of  the  arguments  ;  but  the  ruse 
will  not  succeed.  Like  the  old  professor,  I  shall  now  unmask 
this  piece  of  polemical  strategy,  and  show  that  you,  reverend 
sir,  have  not  advanced  one  step  in  the  solution  of  the  question 
at  issue. 

Without  adverting  for  a  moment  to  your  irrelevant  attack  on 
the  outline  of  the  foundation  which  I  gave  of  my  faith,  and 
which,  more  than  ever,  convinces  me  of  the  absurdity  of  at- 
tempting an  oral  discussion,  under  the  circumstances,  I  will, 
forthwith,  apply  myself  to  a  notice  of  your  attempted  vindica- 
tion of  your  system  of  belief,  and  in  so  doing,  I  must  confess 
that  I  feel  ashamed  of  the  slight  effort  necessary  to  the  refuta- 
tion of  the  position. 

Now,  reverend   sir,  before  I  proceed  to  analyze,  precision  is 


2Q  THE    KEY  TO    TKUE    CHRISTIANITY. 

absolutely  necessary — hence,  inasmuch  as  you  claim  divine  in- 
spiration for  the  new  testament,  "  independently  of  church  or 
pope,"  we  had  better  define  what  inspiration  is  :  It  is  generally 
defined  as  "  a  special  impulse,  direction  and  presence  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  controlling  the  mind  of  the  writer,  not  permitting 
him  to  err,  and  inducing  him  to  write  what  God  wishes."  It  is 
now  competent  for  us  to  apply  this  generally-received  definition 
to  the  system  of  religion,  which  claims  for  the  new  testament, 
the  above  influence  of  the  Holy  Ghost  ;  in  other  words,  that 
the  Holy  Ghost,  not  man,  is  the  author  of  the  new  testament. 

The  proofs  you  present  for  the  inspiration  are  three-fold.  1st. 
Miracles  which  are,  you  say,  the  stamp  of  God,  Sic.  If  mira- 
cles be  the  test,  will  you  please  say  how  many  Luke  and  Mark 
performed  .?  and  if  you  fail  to  find  any,  count  out  from  the  new  tes- 
tament the  gospels  of  Mark  and  Luke,  respectively,  and  the 
Acts  of  the  apostles,  written  by  Luke,  and  they  will  leave  a 
wide  gap  in  your  new  testament.  Again,  has  any  of  the  writers 
said  that  God  "  directed  "  him  to  write  .?  You  have  repeated 
that  assertion,  and  I  require  the  proof.  Have  they  declared 
that  THEY  wrote  one  line  by  the  inspiration  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  ?  I  say,  emphatically,  no  !  and  defy  proof  to  the  con- 
trary. And  where  did  you  learn  that  they  were  inspired  to  write? 
I  deny  the  possibility  of  proving  that  the  apostles  were 
inspired.  I  warned  you  in  my  former  letter  to  "take  nothing 
for  granted."  The  apostles  I  admit,  were  preserved  from  erring 
by  the  constant  presence  of  the  Holy  Ghost ;  but  immunity  from 
error  in  teaching  by  word  of  mouth,  which  the  Catholic  church 
claims,  is  not  inspiration  to  write.  Surely  the  foundation  of  a 
religion  should  be  better  grounded  than  on  such  hap-hazard  guess- 
ing as  this.  Proof  2d.  You  say:  "The  doctrine  itself  confirms 
the  persuasion,"  &c.  Who  questions  the  divinity  of  the  doc- 
trine .?  It  was  taught  by  Christ,  and  preached  by  His  apostles, 
years  before  a  line  of  the  new  testament  was  written.  The 
record  of  the  doctrines  written  by  contemporary  historians  is  true 
too,  but  because  true,  is  it  therefore  inspired?  Is  every  truth  a 
divine  inspiration.?  So  much  for  proof  No.  2.  3d.  You  say: 
"finally,  those  inspired  (?)  teachers,  as  all  christian  ministers,"  kc. 

I  confess  that  this  proof  completely  transcends  my  intellect. 


THE   KEY  TO   TRUE   CHRISTIANITY. 


27 


Are  the  christian  ministers  of  this  day  inspired?  You  will  have 
to  give  me  some  small  change  for  this  proof,  or  some  of  your  in- 
spiration, before  I  can  comprehend  the  force  of  that  argument. 

And  this  is  the  sum  of  the  proofs  you  furnish  for  the  founda- 
tion of  your  faith !  You  have  invited  me  to  discuss  the  grounds 
of  our  respective  faiths — your's  is  now  '•''sub  lite.'^  I  will  not 
shrink  from  mine  when  the  time  comes — but  not  a  word  from 

ME  UNTIL  YOU  HAVE  FULFILLED  THE  CONDITIONS  OF  THE  PROF- 
FER MADE  BY  YOURSELF.  How  much  more  advisable  would  it 
have  been  for  you  to  be  prepared  with  the  necessary  proofs,  (if 
available)  rather  than  to  be  guilty  of  the  miserable  fallacy  called 
by  logicians,  ignorantia  elenchl^  calling  off  the  attention  of  your 
readers  from  the  question  at  issue,  to  a  question  which  was  not 
under  discussion?  Of  (bourse,  I  was  too  old  a  bird  to  be  drawn 
ofF  by  your  decoy-duck,  and  I  trust  that  your  readers  will,  like 
the  college-visitors,  see  the  deception  and  take  a  note  accordingly. 

Come,  reverend  sir,  let  me  admonish  you  that  my  treatment  of 
you  in  every  instance,  where  you  take  up  matter  extraneous  to 
the  subject,  will  be  similar  to  that  of  this  morning.  Believe  me, 
you  have  more  to  do  than  you  can  well  stagger  under  at  present, 
without  raising  outside  issues,  which  I  will,  in  every  instance,  ig- 
nore. I  repeat  that  your  cause  requires  all  your  efforts,  and,  too, 
all  the  external  aid  you  can  acquire. 

The  proofs  already  adduced,  I  have  scattered  to  the  winds. 
You  can  now  understand  what  I  meant  by  the  word  "human," 
as  distinguished  from  a  "divine"  production.  Matthew,  Mark, 
Luke,  John  and  the  others  remain  undisputed  authors  of  their  re- 
spective works,  and  unless  you  can  furnish  proofs  that  the  Holy 
Ghost  participated  signally  in  their  writings,  the  conclusion  is  in- 
evitable that  the  pillars  of  your  system  have  no  foundation 
whereon  to  rest,  and  the  new  testament  remains  to  you  a  human 
production.  Remember  that  you  have  to  confine  yourself  to  the 
proofs  of  the  inspiration  of  the  new  testament.  Don't  hesitate 
to  invite  your  friends  to  the  rescue — your  battle  is  theirs.  Ap- 
peal to  them  in  the  words  of  Job :  *''' Miser emini  ?nel^  miseremini 
mei^  saltcjn  vos  amici  mei^  quia  manus  [Sacerdotls  Romani)  tetlgit 
mey     "Have  pity   on   me,   have  pity  on  me,  at  least  you,  my 

friends,  for  the  hand,"  &c.,  &c. 

Respectfully, 

M.  O'KEEFE. 


23  THE   KEY  TO  TRUE   CHRISTIANITY. 

NORFOLK,  AUGUST  26, 1872. 
REV.  J.  D.  BLACKWELL,  D.  D. 

*'  Ah  me  !    what  perils  do  environ 
The  man  that  meddles  wtth  cold  iron  ! 
What  plaguing  mischiefs  and  mishaps 
Do  dog  him  still  with  afterclaps  ! 
For  tho'  dame  Fortune  seems  to  smile. 
And  leer  upon  him  for  a  while, 
She'll  after  show  him  in  the  nick 
Of  all  his  glories,  a  dog  trick." 

— Hudibras,  Canto    Bd. 

Dear  Sir  :  Ah  me  !  twelve  days  more  of  exhausting  and 
exhaustive  toil,  and  with  what  results !  *  *  *  * 

Surely,  reverend  sir,  you  must  be  again  ready  for  another  trip, 
and  richly  do  you  deserve  it,  if  the  people  appreciate  your  efforts 
to  blind  them  with  your  mud,  as  highly  as  you  do  yourself. 
And  so  the  Bishop,  as  much  enamored  of  his  productions  as  you 
are  of  yours,  asked  the  stripling  "  what  are  they  worth  when 
written  ?"  The  modesty  of  the  application  to  yourself,  can  be 
equalled  only  by  its  peculiar  fitness.  Should  the  material  that 
composed  the  Bishop's  sermons,  (the  time  being  equal — two 
weeks  nearly,  for  each  bank  of  mud)  be  equal  in  quality  and 
quantity  to  your  lucubrations,  I  assure  you,  much  would  not  be 
lost,  did  it  take  him  and  you  two  years  to  complete  one. 

As  usual,  pitching  your  dirt  at  old  mother  church,  her  Popes, 
councils,  Szc.  She  has  survived  treatment  worse  far  than  this, 
for  nearly  nineteen  centuries,  and  I  venture  to  say  she  will  get 
over  this  too.  But  is  it  possible,  reverend  sir,  that  the  people 
are  not  aware  of  the  hollowness  of  the  game  you  are  seeking  to 
play  ?  They  clearly  perceive  that  all  that  fetid  matter,  you  are 
raking  up,  and  seeking  to  blind  them  with,  is  a  dodge,  but  by  no 
means  a  clever  one,  to  call  their  attention  off  the  real  question 
at  issue.  They  are  perfectly  well  aware  that  you  undertook  to 
prove  that  the  bible  was  an  inspired  work,  and  instead  of  devot- 
ing yourself  to  your  task,  you  are  disgusting  them  by  the  intro- 
duction of  matter  that  has  no  more  bearing  on  the  subject  at 
issue,  than  if  you  were  to  introduce  a  dissertation  on  philology. 
Like  myself,  they  expect  when  a  man  has  work  to  do,  he  will 


THE    KEY  TO    TRUE    CHRISTIANITY. 


29 


do  It,  and  not  be  trifling  with  their  good  nature  and  time  by 
mjake-believes. 

In  reply  to  my  strictures  on  your  proofs  of  the  divine  inspira- 
tion of  the  new  testament,  I  should  prefer  not  to  be  obliged  to 
unmask  a  piece  of  unfair  dealing,  unworthy  a  fair  or  honest  con- 
troversialist. In  your  letter  of  this  morning,  you  state  that  your 
first  argument  for  inspiration  was  from  the  theory  of  the  Romish 
church,  &c.  Now,  reverend  sir,  this  is  not  so.  You  approached 
your  subject  in  your  letter  of  the  9th,  inst.,  thus  :  "I  proceed  to 
show  you  briefly  our  method  of  proving  the  divine  inspiration  of 
the  new  testament,"  and  forthwith,  you  proceed  to  offer  miracles 
as  your  first  proofs  and  when  I  asked  you  to  apply  miracles, 
which  you  called  the  "  stamp  of  God  "  to  the  Gospels  of  Mark 
and  Luke,  and  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  putting  the  question 
how  many  miracles  they  performed  ?  and  suggesting,  that  if  you 
could  prove  none  performed  by  them,  to  count  them  out  of  the 
bible,  you  replied  by  an  apparent  concession  of  your  inability 
to  prove  any  miracles  performed  by  these  writers,  although  you 
decline  to  withdraw  their  writings  from  the  bible — hence  the 
utter  failure  of  miracles,  your  "  stamp  of  God,"  and  your  first  ^  not 
second^  proof  of  inspiration  is  extinct.  Your  second  proof,  com- 
mencing thus  :  "  Then  the  doctrine  itself  confirms  this  persua- 
sion, &c.,"  was  so  summarily  dismissed  by  me,  that  you  did  not 
even  advert  to  it  in  your  reply  to  my  refutation  of  it.  Hence 
two  or  three  proofs  are  abandoned. 

Your  explanation  of  your  third  proof,  which  was  too  *  deep  for 
me  before,  may  have  cleared  up  the  ambiguity  of  the  phraseology, 
but  it  certainly  is  too  much  for  me  yet ;  for  I  cannot  compre- 
hend how  such  a  jumble  could,  by  any  rational  being,  be  pro- 
posed as  a  proof  of  the  inspiration  of  any  book  that  may  happen 
to  treat  of  it ;  or  how  any  man  in  good  faith,  could  offer 
such  a  proof,  is  beyond  my  comprehension.  Listen,  dear  reader, 
to  the  specimens  of  logical  reasoning :  The  scriptures  tell  us 
how  we  may  be  born  again ;  how  become  new  creatures,  and 
they  say,  "  beUeve  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,"  &c.,  ergo,  the 
scriptures  are  inspired.  Now,  reverend  sir,  you  have  furnished 
us  in  the  reasons  alleged,  a  compendium  of  what  the  scriptures 
propose  and  faithfully  too,  I  am  authorized  to  declare  your  in- 


QQ  THE  KEY  TO  TEUE  CHRISTIANITY. 

spiration^  because  you  declare  God^s  truths  in  writing  also ;  hence,  a 
pari,  I  conclude  that  every  sermon,  every  religious  work  con- 
taining God's  truth,  is,  therefore^  v^^ritten  by  the  Holy  Ghost, 
the  hand  of  the  writer  being  only  the  instrument.  How  does 
that  parity  of  reasoning  work  ?  You  have  heard  of  the  axiom 
in  logic  ?  ^od  probat  nimis^  probat  nihil :  "  What  proves  too 
much,  proves  nothing."  You  conclude  this  proof  (?)  thus  : 
"  No  serious  man  would  delay  a  moment  on  the  question  of  in- 
spiration, if  he  was  assured  of  the  truth  of  the  writing.  This 
you  grant  to  me  when  you  say,  I  can  receive  the  scriptures  as 
truthful."  Can  you,  reverend  sir,  be  serious  in  that  language  ? 
Is  the  writer  who  writes  what  is  true^  therefore^  inspired  by  the 
Holy  Ghost  ?  Is  every  written  human  production,  (because 
truthful)  the  joint  work  of  the  Holy  Ghost  and  the  author  ?  and  you 
seek  to  foist  such  an  admission  on  me,  saying,  this  I  grant,  &c. 
God  forbid  that  I  could  ever  be  so  demented,  or  that  my  intel- 
lect should  ever  become  so  clouded  as  to  admit  that  because  a 
human  production  is  truthful^  it  becomes  the  joint  property  of 
the  Holy  Ghost  and  the  author.  Your  ideas  of  inspiration  are 
certainly  of  a  very  lucid  character. 

Let  me  once  again  throw  some  light  on  the  subject ;  but  before 
I  proceed  to  do  so,  I  cannot  forbear  commenting  on  the  bad  faith 
that  you,  reverend  sir,  have  exhibited,  ab  initio^  in  the  discussion. 

Your  letter  of  the  9th  began  with  the  proofs  for  the  inspiration 
of  the  new  testament  with  the  words :  "  I  proceed,"  &c.  This 
you  entered  upon  in  apparent  good  faith ;  you  presented  three 
proofs  (numbered  by  me  l,  2,  and  3  in  my  reply);  the  first  I  dis- 
posed of  in  short  order,  viz :  the  miracles.  Your  2d  proof  com- 
menced with  the  words:  "Then  the  doctrine,"  &:c.,  (and  1 
marked  it  No.  2  in  my  reply);  you,  however,  finding  it  im- 
possible to  meet  my  refutation  of  it,  utterly  abandoned  it  to  its 
fate,  but  that  the  public  may  not  notice  the  back-down,  you  pur- 
posely change  the  numbering,  falsify  the  order  of  your  proofs, 
and  instead  of  the  miracle — proof  No.  i — you  substitute  another 
which  did  not  appear  amongst  your  proofs — thereby  making  the 
1st  proof  the  second,  to  cover  the  absence  of  what  was  really  the 
2d  proof,  viz :  the  one  proposed  from  the  doctrine.  This  was  a 
ruse  unworthy  a  man  whose  self-respect  and  character  were 
dear  to  him;  and  behold  another  specimen  !     In  this  connection 


^  THE   KEY  TO  TKUE  CHKISTIANITY.  gj^ 

I  asked,  once  again,  for  the  proof  of  the  assertion  that  God  directed 
the  bible  to  be  zvritten ;  for  the  text  proving  that  proposition  would 
be  invaluable  just  now;  but  alas!  the  oracle  is  again  silent !  An 
apparent  honesty  manifests  itself  in  the  proofs  by  miracles,  for 
the  purpose  of  concealing  your  utter  discomfiture  in  the  failure  of 
your  proof;  but  not  a  word^  when  there  is  nothing  gained  but  mor- 
tification, in  making  the  latter  admission  of  error.  In  what  Ian- 
gunge  should  conduct  of  this  kind  be  characterized? 

Now,  reverend  sir,  these  be  your  proofs  presented  for  the  in- 
spiration of  the  scriptures !  Two  of  them  proved  dead  failures ; 
the  <hird  I  have  to-day  strangled  and  I  hardly  think  you  will 
touch  its  decaying  carcass  for  the  purpose  of  galvanizing  a  little 
life  into  it. 

Behold,  then,  your  utter  failure  to  maintain  one  decent  proof 
for  the  inspiration  of  the  scriptures?  This  is  precisely  what  I 
foretold.  But  in  to-day's  letter  I  read  the  following:  "As  to  my 
views  on  inspiration  the  public,  of  course,  will  understand  that  I 
do  not  propose  to  offer  such  proofs  on  the  subject  as  I  would  present 
to  a  class  of  students  or  to  a  set  of  skeptics."  The  public^  of 
course  understand  no  such  thing.  They  understand  this  morning 
that  you  have  in  your  two  last  letters  made  an  abortive  attempt 
to  prove  the  inspiration  of  the  scriptures — they  understand  that 
in  a  three  and  a  half  column  letter  ostensibly  to  be  devoted  to 
the  proofs  of  inspiration — one-fifth  of  that  letter  was  occupied 
with  the  most  puerile  attempts  to  sustain  your  platform,  while 
four-fifths  of  the  same  letter  were  devoted  to  subjects  a  thousand 
miles  away  from  the  issue;  and  that  too^for  the  purpose  of  throw- 
ing dust  and  mud  in  their  eyes,  that  they  might  not  see  the  utter 
vvorthlessness  of  your  proofs ;  but  this  dodge  I  have  shown  up  in 
my  last. 

Now,  reverend  sir,  the  public  must  have  "these  proofs  that  you 
would  present  to  a  class  of  students  or  to  a  set  of  skeptics;" 
that  is,  if  they  exist.  I  deny  their  existence — you  assert  it.  / 
demand  for  mysef  and  the  public  their  forthcoming.  Those  you 
have  brought  forward  have  vanished ;  bring  up  your  reserves. 
Let  us  have  them  at  once;  don't  let  the  cause  perish  by  default; 
but  if  you  do  not,  I  now  warn  you  that  I  shall  characterize  your 
failure  to  do  so  in  truthful,  but  not  very  complimentary  terms. 
My   demand  for   these  proofs  must  he  met.      The  public  and  myself 


22  THE    KEY  TO    TKUE    CHRISTIANITY.  , 

want  the  reserves  called  out  at  once.  Having  slain  and  buried  the 
proofs  already  presented  by  you  to  the  public,  I  shall,  whilst 
awaiting  the  reserves,  beg  leave  "to  carry  the  war  into  Africa" 
by  presenting  to  my  readers  the  true  position  of  the  litigants  in 
reference  to  the  question  of  inspiration  of  the  Scriptures,  and  to 
this  explanation  I  would  respectfully  call  their  attention. 

From  the  definition  already  given  of  inspiration,  it  follows  that 
every  inspired  writing  has  two  representatives  or  authors — the  one 
visible — the  other  viz :  the  Holy  Ghost,  invisible.  Now,  as  God 
requires  faith,  according  to  St.  Paul  to  the  Hebrews,  ii  c.  6  v.  : 
"  For  without  faith,  it  is  impossible  to  please  God,"  and  as  the 
object  of  our  faith  must  be  the  revelation  made  by  God,  it 
follows  that  a  just  God  cannot  threaten  with  the  Divine  dis- 
pleasure, him,  who  cannot  conscientiously  convince  himself  that 
God  has  made  a  revelation.  Now  God  can  make  a  revelation 
in  one  of  two  ways :  First.  By  word  of  mouth,  as  He  did  to 
Adam,  as  His  Divine  Son  did,  during  His  life  on  earth ;  or, 
secondly.     By  command  to  write. 

Those  who  truly  fear  the  displeasure  of  God,  conveyed  within 
the  above  text,  will  feel  it  incumbent  on  them  to  use  earnestly 
the  intelligence  given  them  by  God  to  ascertain  with  absolute  cer- 
tainty^ whether  in  the  Christian  dispensation,  God  has  adopted 
one  or  both  of  the  above  media  of  communicating  with  man. 

Should  he  believe  the  words  of  the  apostle,  his  conduct  is 
criminal  and  deserving  the  reprobation  of  God,  should  he  fail  to 
avail  himself  of  every  means  of  knowing  the  revealed  will  of 
God ;  less  than  this  the  conscientious  christian  who  dreads  God's 
displeasure  cannot  do;  whilst  alas!  how  many  millions  of  so- 
called  christians  are  there,  who  never  for  a  moment  question  the 
foundations  of  their  faith !  whose  faith  is  pinned  to  the  sleeve  of 
reverend  doctor  Holdforth,  and  who  will  not  hear  any  arguments 
that  would  be  calculated  to  shake  their  faith  in  the  reverend  doc- 
tor, not  in  God;  with  such  persons  it  is  hard  to  have  patience — 
they  can  furnish  no  grounds  for  the  faith  or  hope  that  is  in  them, 
and  yet  you  must  not  disturb  the  calm  complacency  that  inebriates 
their  souls,  notwithstanding  the  words  of  God  :  "He  that  be- 
iieveth  not  will  be  condemned,"  are  heard  by  them — they  do  not 
apply  to  them — they  believe — what?  falsehood,  very  probably. 
But  God  requires  belief  in  truth^  not  in  falsehood.     A  false  faith 


THE    KEY    TO    THUE    CIIKISTIANITY.  33 

Is  no  faith,  and  I  maintain  that  the  man  or  woman,  who  has  not 
examined  with  scrupulous  diligence  into  the  foundation  of  his 
faith,  and  who  Is  not  prepared  to  declare  before  the  throne  of 
God,  that  after  the  most  mature  deliberation,  he  unequivocally 
has  arrived  at  the  conclusion,  that  the  foundation  of  his  faith  Is 
Immovable — I  say  that  such  man  or  woman  may  expect  to  have 
applied  to  him  or  her,  the  words  of  Jesus  Christ,  "He  that  be- 
lieveth  not  shall  be  condemned."  It  Is  then  the  will  of  God  that 
man  should  believe;  but  what?  God's  revelation.  Where  Is 
this  to  be  found  ?  The  biblical  platform  assures  him  that  the 
bible,  the  whole  bible,  without  note  or  comment.  Independent  of 
Pope  or  church,  contains  the  whole  revelation  of  God.  Now,  I 
fearlessly  proclaim  the  platform  false  and  without  foundation,  and 
I  shall  prove  to  a  demonstration  this,  my  declaration,  and  I  con- 
jure those  who  read  these  lines  to  ponder  them  carefully,  and  with 
their  immortal  souls  In  their  keeping,  should  I  prove  to  be  right 
in  my  discussion  of  the  question,  to  seek  some  other  haven  of 
safety-— for  a  false  faith  Is  no  faith,  and  "  cannot  please  God." 

Let  us  then  approach  this  question  with  a  sincere  desire  to  learn} 
the  truth^  and  If  our  present  faith  has  no  foundation,  or  Is  false,, 
or  contradictory,  reject  it  unhesitatingly. 

We  will  now  open  the  book  known  as  the  bible — it  has  ever 
been  recognized  as  furnishing  many  acts,  and  sayings  of  Jesus 
Christ,  whom  we  believe  to  be  God.  Its  several  parts  were  writ- 
ten by  men  conversant,  more  or  less,  with  these  acts  and  sayings, 
and  the  laws  of  criticism  having  tested  the  credibility  of  these 
writings,  pronounce  them  genuine,  authentic,  and  truthful.  But 
we  are  looking  for  the  revelation  of  Jesus  Christ  to  man.  In  this 
book ;  to  be  sure,  we  have  a  i^^  fragments  containing  the  words 
of  Jesus  Christ  therein,  and  attested  to  by  these  authors — we  have 
the  beautiful  sermon  on  the  mount,  &c.,  but  all  else  contained 
therein  are  the  Ideas  of  the  writers  committed  to  writing.  What 
we  have  secured  contains  but  the  slightest  atom  of  what  Jesus 
Christ  revealed ;  for  one  of  these  writers  (the  beloved  disciple) 
says  that  he  did  not  think  that  all  the  books  In  the  world  would 
contain  all  that  Jesus  said  and  did — hence  the  absurdity  contained 
in  the  biblical  platform,  that  the  bible  contains  the  whole  revelation 
of  God — a  pocket  bible  capacious  enough  to  contain  what  all  the 

3 


34  THE    KEY  TO    TRUE    CHEISTIATn'ITT. 

books  in  the  world  could  not  contain  ?     It  is  therefore  conclusive 
that  St.  John,  or  the  "platform"  is  in  egregious  error. 

Hence,  we  must  look  to  some  other  source  in  order  to  acquire 
possession  of  the  whole  teachings  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  the  Master 
himself  indicates  the  same,  when  (Matthew  28,  c.  20v.)  he  com- 
mands the  apostles  to  go  and  teach  all  nations,  all  the  tbhjgs  He 
commanded  them.  He  committed  to  them  all  the  tj'uths^  all 
things  whatsoever  I  have  heard  of  my  Father,  I  have  made  known 
to  you  (John  15  c.  15  v.)  by  word  of  mouth,  and  he  ordered 
them  to  go  and  teach  in  the  same  manner  as  he  taught  them,  by 
word  of  mouth — there  was  no  command  to  write^  and  the  proof  of 
this  is,  that  the  majority  of  them  did  not  write.  The  apostles 
obeyed  this  summons  of  their  Master,  and  went  forth  teaching  all 
the  truths  wherein  they  were  instructed  by  Him ;  and  this  they 
continued  during  their  lives — five  of  them  only  leaving  a  few 
manuscripts  written,  for  the  most  part,  for  special  occasions. 
But  as  we  are  looking  for  the  revelation  of  Jesus  Christ  at  the 
distance  of  nearly  nineteen  centuries  from  the  period  of  their 
teachings,  and  as  we  have  seen  the  absurdity  of  looking  for  the 
whole  revelation  from  a  few  letters,  and  as  the  whole  revelation 
was  confided  to  the  apostles,  and  as,  moreover,  it  is  an  incontest- 
ible  fact  that  the  volume  of  letters  was  not  therefore  the  original 
source  of  revelation,  inasmuch  as  it  had  no  existence  as  a  whole^ 
for  three  score  years,  whilst  millions,  meantime,  believed  during 
that  period  all  the  truths  that  the  apostles  taught — therefore,  they 
believed  and  "pleased  God"  by  their  faith,  without  ever  having 
seen  the  bible — consequently,  the  bible,  as  we  possess  it,  was 
never  intended  by  God  to  be  the  sole  medium  of  His  revelation 
to  man ;  so  far  from  this,  the  Son  of  God  altogether  ignored  any 
such  means  of  conveying  His  revelation  to  mankind,  and  this 
reasoning,  based  on  facts,  is  sustained  by  the  word  of  St.  Paul, 
whereby  he  places  writing  as  secondary  to  the  mode  adopted  bv 
Jesus  Christ,  and  practiced  by  the  apostles  during  their  lives. 
In  his  second  epistle  to  the  Thessalonians  he  says  :  "  Therefore, 
brethren,  stand  fast,  and  hold  the  traditions  you  have  learned, 
whether  by  word  or  by  our  epistles."  Here  we  have  a  direct 
refutation  of  the  system,  which  enunciates  that  the  bible  contains 
the  whole  word  of  God ;  for  the  apostle  clearly  indicates  that  the 
word  of  God  is  conveyed  by  two  modes — by  word  of  mouth  and 


THE    KEY   TO    TKUE   CHRISTIANITY.  35 

by  writing — giving  the  preference  to  the  first  mode,  conformably 
with  the  practice  of  the  apostles  during  their  lives.  The  same 
apostle  confirms  this  declaration  when  writing  to  Timothy  (2d 
Ep.,  11.  c.  2v.)  :  "  And  the  things  thou  hast  heard  from  me  by 
many  witnesses,  the  same  commend  to  faithful  men,  who  shall 
be  fit  to  teach  others  also."  Can  any  blindness  equal  that, 
which,  in  the  face  of  this  latter  text,  declares  that  the  doctrines 
of  Christianity  were  confined  to  the  medium  of  writing,  when 
the  apostle  commands  his  disciple  to  go  and  teach  by  word  of 
mouthy  to  faithful  men  who  were  to  teach  by  word  of  mouth 
others,  the  doctrine  of  Jesus  Christ  ?  For  how  many  gospels 
or  epistles  did  Timothy  write  .?  As  long  as  these  texts  exist, 
they  directly  and  formally  falsify  the  biblical  platform  ;  and  in 
further  proof  of  this,  I  will  now  show  that  its  advocates  do  not 
believe  it  themselves.  Where,  let  me  ask,  can  the  followers  of 
that  system  justify  the  practice  of  baptizing  children,  of  using 
blood,  of  substituting  Sunday  for  the  Sabbath,  &c  ?  There  is  no 
warrant  in  scripture  for  any  one  of  these,  and  the  denial  of 
divine  tradition  by  word  of  mouth,  in  theory^  is  emphatically  con- 
tradicted by  daily  practice — a  course  grossly  inconsistent  before 
God  and  man.  Therefore  the  apostolic  teaching  and  the  prac- 
tice of  Its  own  advocates,  abundantly  disprove  the  claim  that 
the  bible  only  contains  the  whole  word  of  God. 

Therefore  we  collect  from  the  Apostles  John  and  Paul,  who 
are  credible  witnesses,  that  the  book  called  the  bible,  neither 
does  nor  can  give  us  the  whole  revelation  of  Jesus  Christ  ;  and 
that,  whilst  we  possess  a  portion  of  that  revelation  in  the  sayings 
of  Jesus  Christ,  recorded  by  them  and  others,  we  cannot  pos- 
sibly possess  the  whole  in  luriting.  We  have,  however,  in  our 
search,  secured  Christ's  sayings,  and  a  special  message  to  the 
bishops  of  Asia  Minor.  But  the  exponents  of  the  biblical 
theory  may  now  ask :  Why,  if  the  Apostles  faithfully  recorded 
the  sayings  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  we  can  safely  trust  them  in 
recording  and  transmitting  them  to  us  by  writing,  and  since  they 
are  promised  the  divine  assistance  in  teaching — why  may  we 
not  receive  all  they  have  written  as  coming  from  God,  Inasmuch 
as  their  miracles  prove,  they  can  teach  nothing  but  the  truth  ?  I 
answer,  that  we  are  looking  for  the  whole  revelation  of  Jesus 
Christ,  and  God  could  never  say,  "  He  that  believeth  not  shall 


Qg  THE    KEY  TO  TRUE   CHKISTIANITY. 

be  condemned,"  unless  He  furnish  us  a  witness  and  an  inter- 
preter to  His  revelation,  competeiit  a?id  unerring;  the  justice  of 
God  demands  this.  The  apostles,  had  they  all  written,  and 
declared  that  the  Holy  Spirit  ordered  them  to  write,  would  have 
been  competent  witnesses,  and  their  writings  would  have  been 
the  joint  effort  of  the  Holy  Ghost  and  themselves,  as  their 
preaching  was — "the  Holy  Ghost  speaking  through  us."  The 
Apostles  were  not  ordered  to  write,  nor  did  they  all  write,  nor 
did  those  who  wrote  indicate  that  they  wrote  under  divine  in- 
fluence ;  and  it  is  absurd  to  conceive  that  God  will  pronounce  as 
condemned  the  man  who  cannot  in  conscience,  make  an  act  of 
faith  in  what,  at  most,  could  be  no  more  than  a  bad  guess^  against 
which  are  arrayed  the  above  formidable  facts,  all  contradictory 
of  the  guess. 

Again,  the  apostles  failing  to  testify  that  their  writings  were 
the  joint  production  of  the  Holy  Ghost  and  themselves,  unless 
we  are  willing  to  risk  the  displeasure  of  God  and  the  condemna- 
tion of  our  souls  on  a  guess^  it  necessariiy  follows  that  we  should 
look  elsewhere  for  a  witness,  competent  to  testify  to  the  fact 
that  the  apostolic  writings  are  a  revelation,  or  rather  a  portion 
of  a  revelation,  for  the  whole  revelation  they  cannot  possibly  be. 
Let  us  try  to  secure  for  ourselves  the  writings  of  the  apostles  as 
forming  a  portion  of  God's  revelation  on  the  above  "  platform  ;" 
for  the  flag  bearing  the  inscription  :  "  The  bible  and  bible  only 
contains  the  whole  revelation  of  God,"  has  been  badly  per- 
forated by  two  shots  fired  at  it  by  St.  Paul,  one  by  St.  John, 
and,  worse  than  all,  by  the  practices  referred  to  above  by  its 
own  advocates,  all  of  which  have  carried  away  a  large  share  of 
the  bunting ;  yet  there  is  some  left  to  fight  for ;  but  inasmuch 
as  the  apostles  and  its  own  friends  have  not  spared  the  flag,  I, 
too,  will  take  a  shot  or  two  at  it,  and  we  will  judge  of  the  effect. 
I  will  try  my  hand  at  two  or  three  of  the  gospels,  which  are  pre- 
sumed to  be  inspired  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  St.  Mark  (vi.  c.  8v.) 
tells  us  that  Jesus  Christ  commanded  the  apostles  to  carry  a  staffs 
and  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke  were  inspired  by  the  same  Holy 
Ghost  to  write  respectively  (x  c.  lOv.  and  Ix  c.  3V.)  that  Jesus 
Christ  commanded  them  not  to  carry  one.  It  is  bad  enough  for 
these  writers  to  be  contradicting  each  other  directly^  withou" 
dragging  in  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  saddling  Him  with  the  author- 


THE    KEY  TO    TllUE   CHRISTIANITY. 


37 


ship  of  this  flat  contradiction.  Will  the  advocates  of  the  bible, 
without  note  or  comment,  independently  of  church  or  Pope, 
relieve  the  Spirit  of  Truth  from  the  terrible  imputation  of  having 
flatly  contradicted  Himself?  or,  rather  than,  that  He  should  be 
convicted  of  this  terrible  charge,  which  amounts  to  blasphemy, 
is  it  not  better  to  exculpate  Him  from  having  anything  to  do 
with  these  three  gospels,  and  let  the  writers  of  them  bear  all  the 
consequences  of  their  contradictions.  This  would  be  the  lesser, 
far,  of  two  evils.  So  that  shot  carries  away  three  large  shreds  of 
the  bunting.  One  shot  more,  and  I  shall  have  done.  I  read  in 
Matthew  and  Luke,  (King  James'  Bible),  that  Christ  gave  to 
the  world  a  prayer,  which  has  ever  since  been  known  as  the 
"  Lord's  Prayer,"  and  which  is  recited  from  childhood  by  Chris- 
tians. Here  again  is  trouble.  How,  I  ask,  can  we,  bearing  in 
mind  the  terrible  threats  denounced  by  St.  John,  (for  the  present 
we  will  presume,  he  was  inspired,  dato  non  concesso)  against  those 
who  dare  to  add  to,  or  take  from  sacred  scripture,  reconcile  it 
with  our  conscience,  to  believe  that  the  same  Holy  Ghost  who 
made  that  threat  through  St.  John,  could  have  inspired  St. 
Matthew  to  complete  the  prayer  with  the  words,  "  for  thine  is 
the  kingdom,  the  power  and  the  glory,  for  ever,  &c..  Amen  ;" 
whilst  he  inspired  St.  Luke  to  write  that  Jesus  Christ  did  not 
utter  one  word  of  this  ?  We  have  to  deal  here  with  a  fact — it  is, 
whether  Christ  ever  uttered  these  words.  If  he  did,  did  the 
Holy  Ghost  inspire  St.  Luke  to  reject  them  ?  if  he  did  not,  did 
the  Holy  Ghost  inspire  St.  Matthew  to  insert  them  ? 

Now  rather  than  be  guilty  of  the  blasphemy  of  attributing  to 
the  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  contradiction  in  a  ques- 
tion of  fact,  I  would  hold  the  writers  responsible,  and  declare 
that  such  men  could  not  be  inspired.  This  shot  has  a  telling 
effect  on  the  bunting.  To  resume  our  investigation,  the  apostles 
having  failed  to  come  to  the  rescue  by  declaring  themselves 
inspired  to  write,  it  behooves  us  in  order  to  sustain  the  flag,  and 
thereby  escape  the  condemnation  of  Jesus  Christ,  to  invoke,  in 
aid  of  the  flag  and  its  inscription,  all  the  testimony  which  nature 
and  reason  have  placed  at  our  disposal,  and  should  these  fail  us, 
then  let  the  rag  go^  and  seek  some  other  means,  whereby  the 
whole  revelation  of  God  can  be,  with  unerring  certainty^  assured 
to  man. 


QO  THE  KEY  TO  TRUE  CHRISTIANITY. 

For  this  purpose  we  will  call  to  our  aid  all  the  resources  that 
philosophy  has  at  her  disposal  in  the  shape  of  evidence.  The 
motives  of  certainty,  or  the  sources  of  evidence,  are  of  a  seven- 
fold character.  Whatever  man  knows,  he  has  obtained  through 
one  or  other  of  these  sources  of  evidence,  and  he  knows  nothing 
that  he  has  not  acquired  through  one  or  other  of  them.  They 
are  the  only  resources  of  evidence  left  us  to  attain  certainty  as  to 
the  inspiration  of  the  apostolic  writings.  These  sources  of  cer- 
tainty, or  motives  of  credibility,  as  they  are  written  by  philoso- 
phers are  classified  in  the  three  orders  to  which  they  belong, 
viz.  :  In  the  metaphysical  order  we  have  two  of  these  motives, 
viz.  :  the  sensus  intimus^  or  conscience,  and '  evidence.  In  the 
physical  order  there  is  but  one  motive  of  certitude,  viz.  :  the 
testimony  of  the  five  senses  of  man.  Thirdly.  In  the  moral 
order  there  are  four  motives,  viz.  :  the  consent  of  men  ;  the 
testimony  of  men  ;  memory,  and  analogy.  It  is  now  our  duty  to 
inquire  carefully,  and  see  if  one  or  other  of  these  sources  of  cer- 
titude will  not  infallibly  lead  us  to  the  inspiration  of  the  apostolic 
writino^s.  And  first,  what  can  the  sensus  intlmus  or  conscience 
avail  us  in  our  search  ?  It  is  defined  as  the  faculty  of  the  mind, 
whereby  it  is  cognizant  of  its  own  internal  perceptions,  but  as 
what  we  are  seeking  for  is  something  altogether  external  to  the 
mind,  this  species  of  evidence  avails  us  nothing.  The  same  is 
literally  true  of  the  third  moral  motive  of  certitude,  viz.  : 
memory  ;  for  what  conscience  is  to  the  present  modifications  of 
the  mind,  memory  is  to  the  past.  The  second  metaphysical 
species  of  certitude,  is  what  philosophers  call  evidence  or  pure 
reason — this  motive  of  certainty  is  altogether  occupied  with 
necessary  and  self-evident  truth,  that  requires  no  demonstra- 
tion, viz.  :  twice  two  make  four — the  whole  is  greater  than  its 
part,  &c.  It  is  evident  that  this  motive  of  certitude  can  have 
no  bearing  whatsoever  on  the  question  of  inspiration.  We  now 
pass  to  the  testimony  of  the  senses,  and  as  we  can  neither  feel, 
see,  taste,  smell  or  hear  the  spirit  of  God  in  the  apostolic  writ- 
ings, (although  there  are  not  wanting  deluded  fanatics,  who  pre- 
tend to  taste  the  spirit  of  God  therein),  we  will  not  tarry  a 
moment  here.  The  first  of  the  moral  motives  of  certitude,  is  the 
consent  of  men.  This  motive  consists  in  a  common  judgment 
of  mankind  in  general  truths,  viz.  :  the  existence  of  a  Supreme 


THE    KEY  TO    TllUE    CIIKISTIANITY.  39 

Being,  his  providence,  a  future  life,  Szc.  ;  but  as  the  common 
sense  of  mankind  has  never  yet  been  exercised  on  the  question 
of  inspiration,  we  cannot  appeal  to  it.  The  testimony  of  men  is 
the  next  motive  of  certitude.  Of  this,  we  will  have  something 
more  to  say  than  of  the  others  ;  for  it  may  be  asserted  that  the 
testimony  of  men  is  available  as  a  proof  of  the  inspiration  of  the 
bible,  inasmuch  as  over  three  hundred  millions  of  christians 
believe  it.  But  I  ask,  is  the  testimony  of  men  the  motive 
whereon  it  is  believed  ?  N'o  I  For  five-sixths  of  them  believe 
on  the  testimony  of  God^  Himself^  speaking  through  His  Church, 
which  He  calls  through  His  Apostle  "  the  pillar  and  ground  of 
truth,"  not  on  the  testimony  of  men ;  whilst  the  small  remnant  of 
christians  left,  cannot  claim  this  source  of  certitude,  because 
they  stand  alone,  and  do  not,  therefore,  derive  their  certitude 
from  the  testimony  of  God  or  of  men.  I  have  already  referred 
to  memory.  Finally,  nor  is  analogy  of  any  service  in  the  ques- 
tion at  issue — for  there  does  not  exist  any  term  of  similitude 
from  which  we  could  conclude  in  this  case  ;  for  although  the 
Koran  and  the  Kedas  make  the  same  claim,  yet  their  claim  is 
rejected  by  us,  hence  the  inspiration  of  the  bible  cannot  derive  ^ 
any  aid  from  this  motive  of  certitude. 

Now,  there  is  not  one  particle  of  knowledge  possessed  by  man 
on  earth,  in  the  natural  order  that  does  not  reach  him  through 
one  or  other  of  these  seven  channels  of  certitude  above  referred 
to.  It  is  admitted  by  all  philosophers  worthy'of  the  name  that,  in- 
vested with  the  required  conditions  which  are  specified  in  refer- 
ence to  every  one  of  these  channels,  they  render  the  possessors 
of  such  information  infallibly  certain  of  the  knowledg'fe  conveyed 
through  them.  I  use  the  word  "  infallibly"  purposely,  for  every 
philosopher  will  bear  me  testimony  in  this  statement ;  and  here, 
reverend  sir,  I  respectfully  request  your  permission  to  make  a 
slight  digression  in  this  connection  ;  it  is  for  the  purpose  of  ani' 
madverting  on  either  the  gross  ignorance,  stupidity  or  malice,  (or 
perhaps  all  three  combined  in  many  cases),  of  those  who,  a  few 
years  ago,  when  the  definition  of  papal  infallibility  was  defined, 
inveighed  against  it  with  an  affectation  of  holy  horror,  whilst  the 
same  persons  do  not  hesitate  any  day,  to  enter  a  court  of  justice 
and  swear  to  their  own  infallibility,  that  is,  to  the  impossibility 
of  their  being  mistaken  in  regard  to  any  statement  or  fact  to 


40 


THE   KEY  TO   TKUE   CHKISTIANITY. 


which  they  swear  ;  and  their  sworn  infallibility  on  millions  of 
questions,  is  daily  recognized  by  judges,  juries  and  lawyers  in  all 
such  cases,  but  when  the  Church  of  God  in  solemn  conclave 
proclaims,  that  the  prayer  of  Jesus  Christ  for  Peter  to  His 
Heavenly  Father  was  heard  :  "  I  have  prayed  for  Thee^  Peter, 
that  thy  faith  should  not  fail,"  and  that  Peter  and  his  legitimate 
successors  cannot  teach  false  doctrines  by  virtue  of  that  prayer ; 
behold  !  Rome  is  charged  with  blasphemy,  and  that  which  the 
most  ignorant  man  claims  for  himself  in  a  court  of  justice,  and 
which  is  conceded  to  him,  is  denied  to  the  successor  of  Peter,  to 
whom  the  above  words  were  addressed  by  the  Son  of  God.  To 
resume  : 

Having  exhausted  every  available  source  of  evidence  known 
to  man  in  seeking  to  apply  it  to  the  question  at  issue,  and 
without  the  slightest  approach  to  success,  I  now  ask,  is  it  possi- 
ble to  prove  the  divine  inspiration  of  the  bible,  as  any  portion  of 
the  Word  of  God,  (except  the  words  spoken  by  Christ),  by  any 
of  the  many  sources  of  evidence  known  to  man  in  the  natural 
order  ?     I  answer.  No  ;  most  emphatically. 

Now,  it  is  claimed  by  the  writers  of  the  gospel,  that  they  are 
recording,  in  part  at  least,  a  supernatural  system  of  doctrine  and 
morals  (which  is  unquestionably  the  truth),  and  whilst  the  writers 
quote  the  words  of  Jesus  Christ,  we  receive,  in  the  natural  order, 
supernatural  truths ;  "but  here  we  must  stop,  for  whatever  the 
apostolic  writers  v/rote  beside  the  recorded  sayings  of  Jesus 
Christ,  must  not  be  taken  for  granted,  to  be  in  the  supernatural 
order,  unless  they  themselves  aver  it ;  but  they  have  not  done  so ; 
hence  the  necessity  of  a  supernatural  witness  to  testify  to  the 
supernatural  character  of  the  writing  in  question — hence  the 
secret  of  the  failure  of  all  the  motives  of  certitude  above  re- 
ferred to,  because  of  their  incompetency  to  testify.  A  natural 
witness  is  essentially  incompetent  to  testify  to  the  supernatural. 
Aristotle's  second  rule  of  syllogisms  settles  this,  viz  :  "  Latins 
hunc  quam  promissae  conclusio  non  vult  ,•"  that  is,  the  conclusion 
can  never  transcend  the  premises.  The  premises  being  in  the 
natural  order,  the  conclusion  cannot  be  supernatural ;  but  the 
advocates  of  the  system  referred  to  have  cut  the  ground  from 
under  their  feet,  by  allowing  no  witness  but  the  bible-^hence 
the  impossibility,  on  such  conditions,  of  proving  the  bible  any 


rilE    KEY  TO   TRUE   CHRISTIANITY. 


41 


portion  of  divine  revelation — hence  the  impossibility  of  making 
an  act  of  faith  in  the  divine  authorship  of  the  bible  on  such  a 
basis — hence  the  impossibility  of  "  pleasing  God"  under  that 
flag — hence  the  imminent  danger  of  the  terrible  threat  of  Jesus 
Christ :  "  He  that  believeth  not,  shall  be  condemned," — hence 
the  necessity  of  leaving  Adatthew  and  his  fellow-writers,  the 
undisputed  authors  of  their  respective  works — hence  the  proofless 
assertion  that  the  Holy  Ghost  participated  in  that  work — hence 
the  evidently  suicidal  character  of  the  system  that  blindly  expels 
from  its  precincts  a  supernatural  witness  which  alone  is  compe- 
tent to  testify  to  its  supernatural  origin — hence  its  untruthful- 
ness by  contradicting  flatly  the  apostle,  by  assuming  for  the  bible 
the  monopoly  of  the  whole  revelation^  whilst,  in  fact,  it  cannot 
advance  one  step  towards  proving  one  word  of  it^  a  divine  revela- 
tion, (the  words   recorded   as   spoken  by  Christ,  and   the  above 

referred  to  message,  excepted). 

Respectfully, 

M.  O'KEEFE. 


NORFOLK,  SEPT.  3d,  1873. 
EEV.  J.  D.  BLACKWELL,  D.  D. 

"For  Iludibras,  who  thought  he'd  won 
The  field  as  certain  as  a  gun, 
And  having  routed  the  whole  troop, 
With  victory  was  cock-a-hoop  ; 
Thinking  he'd  done  enough  to  purchase 
Thanksgiving  day  among  the  churches, 
"Wherein  his  mettle  and  brave  worth 
Might  be  explained  by  holder-forth, 
And  register' d  by  fame  eternal. 
In  deathless  pages  of  diurnal ; 
Found  in  few  moments  to  his  cost. 
He  did  but  count  without  his  host; 
And  that  a  turn-stile  is  more  certain 


Dear  Sir  :  Before  I  proceed  to  give  my  attention  to  the  con- 
tents of  your  letter  of  this  morning,  I  feel  it  due  to  myself  and 
friends  to  apologize  to  my  readers,  for  the  use  of  an  expression  to 
be  found  in  my  last,  commencing  with  the  word  "Really,"  &c., 
on  the  eleventh  line,  and  terminating  with  the  sentence  on  the 


42 


THE    KEY   TO  TEUE    CHRISTIANITY. 


thirteenth.  One  or  two  devoted  friends  have  called  my  attention 
to  the  expression,  and  I  hereby  recall  it  as  far  as  I  can  do  so, 
ofFeiing  as  my  apology,  the  exuberance  of  Celtic  hilarity  provoked 
by  the  occasion,  which  unreflectingly  clothed  the  Idea,  suddenly 
presented  to  my  imagination.  In  the  above  not  very  refined  form. 
Hujnayium  est  err  are — it  is  human  to  err,  and  as  I  have  never 
been  ashamed  to  acknowledge  my  fault,  I  hesitate  not  to  make 
the  amende  to  my  readers,  and  to  my  friends,  especially,  who  flat- 
ter me  with  the  assurance  that  such  sins  against  propriety  as  the 
above  are  altogether  alien  to  my  nature  and  education. 

Allow  me  to  congratulate  you,  reverend  sir,  on  your  approxi- 
mation to  the  stripling  in  the  anecdote  of  your  letter  of  the  22d. 
Only  eight  days,  and  the  result,  over  three  columns !  Would 
that  I  could  congratulate  you  on  your  success  In  maintaining  your 
position !  Failure  is  now  a  foregone  conclusion,  hut  you  mean  to 
die  game. 

I  do  not  object  to  your  choice  of  death,  but  I  am  determined 
that  the  readers  of  the  Virginian  shall  witness  it,  and  for  this  pur- 
pose it  will  be  necessary  to  place  before  the  public,  once  more, 
the  true  issue. 

You  invited  me  to  choose  a  subject  to  be  discussed  by  us, 
through  the  columns  of  the  Virginian.  I  chose,  at  your  Invitation, 
the  bible.  I  classified  the  subject  under  discussion  thus:  You 
were  to  prove  the  new  testament  to  be  a  divinely  Inspired  volume, 
in  the  ist  place.  2d.  You  were  to  prove  your  canon  of  the 
scriptures.  3d.  You  were  to  justify  the  right  of  private  judgment 
as  its  Interpreter.  These  three  points  having  been  satisfactorily 
proved,  you  then  had  the  choice  of  any  tenet  of  the  Catholic 
church,  which  you  might  assail  and  which  I  must  defend. 

Now,  reverend  sir,  you  undertook,  according  to  your  proposi- 
tion, to  prove  in  your  first  letter,  after  this  arrangement,  the  ist 
point  In  debate,  viz:  the  inspiration  of  the  new  testament.  Five- 
sixths  of  that  letter  were  devoted  to  abuse  of  the  Catholic  church, 
a  subject  not  at  all  under  discussion,  whilst,  with  an  eye  to  busi- 
ness, you  slipped  in  at  the  fag  end  of  this  long  letter,  what  you 
called  your  proofs  for  the  inspiration  of  the  new  testament.  These 
were  numbered  by  me  i,  2  and  3.  The  ist  was  derived  from 
miracles.  In  the  2d  you  contended  that  the  docrine  confirmed  the 
persuasion.     The  3d  proof  I  could  not,  at  the  time,  understand. 


THE    KEY    TO    TRUE    CIIKISTIANITY.  ^g 

In  attacking  your  first  proof,  viz :  miracles,  I  asked  you  for 
the  rniracles  performed  by  Mark  and  Luke,  and  failing  to  produce 
them  I  insisted  on  the  removal  of  their  gospels  and  of  the  acts  of 
the  apostles,  from  your  canon.  You  would  not  hear  of  it — 
thereby  abandoning  your  first  proof,  viz :  miracles.  I  then  com- 
batted  your  2d  proof;  that  I  succeeded  in  destroying  it,  your 
silence  as  regards  It  is  conclusive.  The  3d  argument,  incompre- 
hensible to  me  hitherto,  you  explained  in  your  letter  of  the  22d 
inst.  This,  too,  I  attacked  successfully,  as  your  abandonment  of 
it  in  to-day's  letter  abundantly  proves.  These  three  proofs  hav- 
ing been  disposed  of  and  having  proved  themselves  utter  failures, 
I  observed  that  in  your  despair,  you  dropped  an  expression  in  your 
letter  of  the  22d  inst.  to  this  effect:  *'As  to  my  views  of  Inspira- 
tion, the  public  will,  of  course,  understand  that  I  do  not  propose 
to  offer  such  proofs  on  the  subject,  as  I  would  present  to  a  class 
of  students  or  to  a  set  of  skeptics."  Now,  reverend  sir,  they 
say  that  a  drowning  man  will  grasp  at  a  straw,  but  I  fear  that  you 
will  let  the  glorious  flag  (or  rather  what's  left  of  it)  that  defied 
•popery  for  300  years,  trail  in  the  dust,  rather  than,  by  the  slight- 
est effort,  which  your  words  Intimate  you  to  be  capable  of,  bear 
to  the  battle-front  the  precious  bunting.  What !  brave  self-con- 
stituted standard  bearer !  will  you  basely  betray  the  sacred  Interests 
which  you,  of  yourself,  voluntarily  assumed  ?      Did  you  not  In  your 

letter  of declare  yourself  about  to  bring  forth  your  proofs? 

and  did  you  not  bring  them  forth  ?  and  when  they  were  demolished 
did  you  not  assert  that  you  possessed  others?  What  will  the 
Protestant  world  say  to  this  conduct.  Their  self-chosen  cham- 
pion to  abandon  their  cause,  to  run  away  In  the  midst  of  battle 
and  basely  betray  the  cause  that  he  professed  to  be  so  dear  to  him. 
He  declares  he  has  reserves — rhe  styles  himself  a  christian  gentle- 
man— and  therefore  to  be  believed;  but  he  Is,  too,  an  officer  In 
the  christian  army — the  army  of  the  bible — and  In  the  heat  of 
battle,  with  reserves  at  his  disposal,  (so  he  says,  and  being  a 
christian  gentleman  we  must  take  his  word  for  Itj  he  shamefully 
abandons  the  battle-field  to  the  foe.  Can  any  treachery  equal 
this?  Bazalne,  at  Metz,  declared  that  until  provisions  had  nearly 
given  out,  he  did  not  surrender  the  city.  Behold  a  worse  than 
Bazalne  here !  He  has,  he  asserts,  the  necessary  munitions  of 
war    sufficient    to  pluck  victory  from  the  grasp  of  the  enemy^ 


44  THE   KEY  TO   TRUE   CHRISTIANITY. 

and  yet  he  is  about  to  surrender !  Friends  of  the  cause !  behold 
your  brave  champion! 

There   is  no  alternative  left,  reverend  sir,  but  to  stigmatize 

such  conduct  as  either  the  basest  treachery  or ,  I  wall  not 

say  what  at  present.  I  offer  you  another  chance  of  redeeming 
yourself.  You  will  have  necessarily  to  choose  either  horn  of  the 
dilemma.  This  is  a  sad  plight.  Like  your  prototype  the  cuttle- 
fish, you  black-well  the  waters  in  your  ignominious  retreat,  but 
whilst  you  may  be  successful  in  blinding  a  i^w^  the  dodge  will 
not  succeed. 

When  the  impartial  reader  of  this  discussion  opens  the  Virginian 
of  to-day,  to  read,  as  he  naturally  expects,  a  powerful  and  ex- 
haustive vindication  of  the  inspiration  of  the  bible  (the  reserves 
being  at  hand !)  and  a  thorough  refutation  of  the  argument  I  ad- 
duced to  show  the  impossibility  of  proving  inspiration  from  any  of 
the  sources  of  certitude  known  to  man  (seeing  that  the  assumption 
that  the  apostles  declared  themselves  inspired  to  write  is  wholly 
gratuitous)  with  what,  may  I  ask,  is  he  entertained?  Instead  of 
bringing  up  these  reserves  or  seeking  to  break  the  force  of  my 
arguments  drawn  from  the  motives  of  certitude,  you  tell  the 
public  that  Sir  William  Hamilton  calls  the  source  of  certitude, 
which  I  translated  from  the  Latin  (having  studied  niy  philosophy 
in  that  language),  conscience,  (the  Latin  term  is  conscientia^  self- 
consciousness,  which  may  be  a  more  appropriate  term — but  how 
can  that  affect  the  argument?  the  motive  of  certitude  is  unmis- 
takable under  either  appelation.  Again,  you  find  fault  with  my 
classification  of  the  moral  motives  of  certitude.  Now,  reverend 
sir,  the  author  whom  I  studied  and  whom  I  follow  as  philosopher 
and  theologian  was  as  much  above  any  Methodist  theologian  or 
philosopher  that  ever  lived  since  the  mushroom  origin  of  the  sect, 
that  the  best  of  them  is  not  worthy  to  tie  the  latchet  of  his  shoe. 
But  what  has  all  this  to  do  with  the  merits  of  my  argument  ?  You 
left  it  untouched,  and  there  it  remains,  a  lasting  barrier  against  the 
possibility  of  proving  inspiration  on  your  principles. 

Never  was  there  a  better  illustration  of  the  Nero-fiddling- 
whilst-Rome-was-burning  policy,  than  you  afford  to-day.  You 
fill  over  three  columns  with  all  kind  of  irrelevant  matter,  whilst 
not  one  proof  exists  on  paper  to-day  in  favor  of  inspiration,  but 


THE    KEY  TO    TRUE   CHRISTIANITY.  ^r 

three  columns  of  cuttle-fish  tactics  are  exhausted  to  cover  one  of 
the  most  ignominious  and  damaging  retreats  ever  witnessed. 

For  shame  !  how  can  any  christian  gentleman  degrade  him- 
self by  such  unworthy  makeshifts  ?  Dare  to  be  honest !  We  are 
all  anxiously  awaiting  the  proofs  of  inspiration.  It  is  too  late  to 
dodge  now — had  you  not  undertaken  to  do  so,  you  might  have 
backed  out  under  some  clever  pretence,  or  the  manly  admission 
that  you  were  deceived  in  supposing  that  you  possessed  proofs, 
whereas  you  know  now  you  have  none.  Unless  this  be  done, 
the  effect  is  damaging  to  yourself  and  cause,  for  the  cause  that 
would  require  such  a  course,  cannot  he  the  cause  of  truth. 

By  the  bye,  I  beg  leave  to  return  my  acknowledgments  rever- 
end sir,  for  your  kind  proffer  of  a  treatise  on  philosophy,  and 
that  I  may  not  be  outdone  in  generosity,  may  I  beg  your  accep- 
tance of  a  grammar  of  the  English  language — but  I  fear  it  is 
^^  most  too  late^'  to  use  your  own  grammatical  (?)  phrase. 

I  now  proceed  to  pay  my  respects  to  what  you  call  your  ca- 
non ;  but  before  so  doing,  I  will  beg  leave  to  recall  for  the  bene- 
fit of  my  readers  an  incident  of  my  youth,  which  perhaps,  more 
than  any  other  cause,  induced  me  to  cast  my  lot  in  this  Western 
hemisphere.  I  recount  this  anecdote  for  the  purpose  of  afford- 
ing to  my  readers  a  just  appreciation  of  the  question  now  about 
to  be  discussed. 

One  morning  in  harvest  time,  the  Protestant  clergyman  resi- 
ding in  my  father's  parish  called  at  our  house,  accompanied  by  a 
bailiff;  he  summoned  my  father  to  visit  his  (my  father's)  lands, 
where  his  crops  of  wheat,  oats,  barley,  hay,  &c.,  were  all  stacked. 
My  father  obeying  the  summons,  with  this  stripling  forming 
his  rear  guard,  had  the  pleasure  to  hear  instructions  given  by  the 
reverend  gentleman  to  his  attendent  to  bring  his  vehicles  next  day, 
and  carry  off  every  tenth  stack  of  wheat,  oats,  barley,  hay,  &c., 
to  be  found  on  my  father's  lands,  and  in  the  spirit  of  christian 
self-denial,  he,  in  every  instance,  chose  the  largest.  My  rea- 
ders will  ask,  why  this  ?  I  asked  my  heart-sick  father  the  same 
question  and  receive  for  an  answer :  My  boy,  the  laws  of  the 
land  authorize  the  Protestant  preacher  to  take  a  tithe  or  tenth 
part  of  the  annual  produce  of  our  lands,  and  although  there  is 
no  equivalent  offered  or  received  (for  I  should  as  soon  call  for 
the  spiritual  services  of  the  hangman  as  for  his,  under  any  cir- 


^Q  THE  KEY  TO  TRUE  CHRISTIANITY. 

cumstances),  yet  the  laws  of  England,  authorize  him  to  appro- 
priate my  hard  earnings,  and  his  conscience  is  nothing  loath. 

Had  this  reverend  gentleman,  whilst  superintending  the  trans- 
fer of  my  father's  toil  to  his  farm-yard  and  granary  in  the  rear  of 
his  stately  mansion,  next  day,  in  the  exercise  of  his  legalized  act 
of  robbery  and  comparing  the  quality  of  the  grain,  &c.,  now  in 
his  wagons  with  that  yet  in  my  father's  possession,  said  to  my 
father;  Our  grain  is  perfectly  alike  in  quality^  in  what  terms 
would  you,  reverend  sir,  characterize  such  a  remark?  The 
application  I  shall  now  make.  You  assure  me  that  our  bibles 
are  identical  as  to  quality,  but  that  as  to  quantity,  I  possess  some- 
what more,  and  you  then  proceed  to  justify  your  rejection  of  what 
you  deem  useless,  or  even  noxious,  and  follow  up  this  rejection  by 
the  inevitable  onslaught  on  Popery,  asserting  what  you  may  believe 
to  be  true,  but  what  I  know  to  be  false ;  for  example,  pronoun- 
cing the  Council  of  Laodicea  to  be  a  General  Council,  and  re- 
peating the  assertion^  and  then  seeking  to  place  in  antagonism  in 
their  teachings.  Pope  Gregory  the  Great,  and  Pius  IX.  the  former 
of  whom,  gave  Christianity  to  England,  whilst  the*  latter  is,  with 
similar  success,  restoring  her — once  merry  and  happy  England — 
rich  in  faith  and  works — to  that  faith  which  the  church  of  Rome, 
under  the  great  Gregory,  gave  her. 

But  as  neither  the  Catholic  church  nor  her  doctrines  are  on 
trial  in  this  stage  of  the  discussion,  I  must  not  say  more  on  this 
subject.  One  word  only  as  regards  St.  Gregory  the  Great 
— in  his  commentary  on  the  20th  chapter  of  Job.  I  have  taken 
the  pains  to  ascertain  and  find  that  he  is  referring  to  the  Books 
of  the  Maccabees  as  not  being  in  the  Jewish  Canon.  What 
becomes  now  of  infallibility  versus  infallibility? 

You  have  more  than  once,  reverend  sir,  with  an  affectation  of 
simplicity  and  self-complacency,  truly  refreshing,  told  your 
readers  that  our  bibles,  at  least  the  new  testaments,  were  similar. 
Now  before  I  discuss  the  secret  of  this  amicable  agreement  on 
the  bible,  I  find  it  necessary  to  remind  you  that  there  is  a  little 
hitch  here  which  clogs  the  whole  machinery  and  leaves  it  per- 
fectly worthless.  I  will  explain.  The  canon  of  the  scriptures 
means  the  catalogue  or  list  ofithe  inspired  writings,  but  as  you 
have  not  yet  presented  a  single  proof  that  one  word  of  the  new 


THE    KEY  TO    TRUE    CHRISTIANITY. 


47- 


testament  (the  exceptions  referred  to  admitted)  is  the  joint  pro- 
duction of  the  Holy  Ghost  and  the  respective  writers  thereof,  I 
ask,  does  it  not  strike  you  as  supremely  ridiculous  to  think  of 
piling  up  your  ore  before  you  know  positively  that  there  is  a 
grain  of  gold  in  your  pile?  Is  it  not  worth  while  to  secure  your 
hare  before  you  set  about  cooking  him  ? 

Yet,  notwithstanding  the  apparent  anomaly  of  the  situation, 
and  because  the  two  branches  of  the  question  are  so  singularly 
interlaced,  I  will  consent  to  discuss  the  question,  or  rather  this 
phrase  of  it,  viz.:   the  canon,  at  once. 

For  this  purpose,  I  will  recall  once  more  the  motto  on  the 
poor  riddled  flag,  to  remind  you  of  your  rule  of  faith.  "The 
bible  and  bible  only,  independently  of  church  or  pope^  contains  the 
whole  word  of  God."  I  will  now  present  a  ^c\v  undeniable  facts 
from  history  for  the  elucidation  of  my  investigation.  As  you 
are  the  acknowledged  champion  of  the  above  motto,  you  will 
not  deny  that  the  Protestant  churches  of  this  country  get  the 
bible  as  you  have  it  to-day,  from  t;he  established  church  of 
England.  That  church  seceded  from  the  Catholic  church  in 
the  i6th  century,  in  the  days  of  that  paragon  of  purity  and  self- 
denial,  Henry  the  VHI.  of  blessed  memory  (the  Redeemer  in 
accordance  with  a  promise  made  to  His  church  that  He  would 
be  always  with  her  to  the  end  of  the  world),  in  reward  of  king 
Hal's  holiness  of  life,  having  chosen  him  as  his  worthiest  agent 
to  be  found,  to  deliver  the  church  of  her  impurities;  which  Hal 
proceeded  to  do  with  a  vim  and  energy  to  be  equalled  only  by 
the  industry  he  displayed  in  getting  rid  of  his  wives,  which  holy 
mission  descended  to  his  well-begotten  and  immaculate  daughter 
— the  mantle  of  Elias  falling  gracefully  and  naturally  on  Eliseus 
— for  which  they  are  now  enjoying  their  reward  !  In  her 
secession,  she^^arried  with  her  the  bible,  which  she  received 
together  with  the  gospel,  from  Rome ;  St.  Augustine  having  been 
sent  as  his  representative  by  Pope  St.  Gregory,  (the  same  Gregory 
whose  bible  was  not  different  in  any  respect  from  that  of  Pius  the 
IX.  of  to-day),  to  convert  to  the  faith  the  pagan  Britons,  whose 
noble  appearance  had  attracted  his  attention,  as,  passing  one  day 
through  the  streets  of  Rome,  he  saw  some  British  youths  for  sale 
in  the  market ;  he  asked  of  what  nation  they  were  ?  and  being 


48  THE    KEY  TO    TRUE    CHRISTIANITY. 

told  that  they  were  Angles,  replied :  "  Non  Angli  sed  Ajigeli  forent 
si  essent  Chrhtiani — they  would  not  be  Angles,  but  Angels,  were 
they  Christians — and  as  soon  as  he  could  he  sent  out  the  above 
named  prelate  (Augustine)  and  his  companions  to  evangelize  the 
pagan  Britons;  which  mission  Augustine  accomplished,  bringing 
with  him  the  joyful  tidings  of  salvation,  which,  with  the  Roman 
bible,  he,  under  God,  conferred  on  his  British  converts.  How 
does  this  public  and  notorious  fact  of  history  accord,  with  that 
plank  in  your  platform  "independently  of  Pope  or  church." 
Why  never  was  a  more  absurd  assertion  ever  before  hazarded 
than  this;  for  the  conversion  of  England  and  the  possession  of 
her  bible  (and  yours  therefore)  are  solely  a?id  exclusively  the  result 
of  the  immediate  and  direct  action  of  a  Pope  (Gregory)  and  of  a 
church  (the  Roman).  How  does  that  shot  tell  on  the  last  shred 
left  of  the  bunting  ?  This  is  a  question  of  fact  ^  and  I  challenge 
fearlessly  its  denial.  It  is,  then,  unquestionable  that  the  Church 
of  England  to-day  and  the  Protestants  of  America  owe  whatever 
Christianity  and  whatever  apostolic  records  they  possess  to  the 
charity  and  zeal  of  Pope  St.  Gregory  and  to  the  church  of  Rome. 
But  I  will  anticipate  an  objection,  viz. :  that  the  bible  might  have 
been  obtained  from  other  churches  at  one  time  or  other.  I  an- 
swer, I  am  now  only  dealing  with  a  fact,  which  I  have  established,^ 
and  I  assert  that  if  ever  there  were  a  people  indebted  to  an  in- 
dividual or  institution  for  a  valuable  favor  or  gift,  it  is  the  English 
people,  who  should  hold  in  veneration,  ever,^  the  names  of  Gregory 
and  Augustine,  who  laid  the  foundation  of  Christianity  in  their 
island,  and  placed  in  their  hands  that  volume  (call  it  what  you  will) 
which  they  appear  to  prize  so  highly.  Nor  should  the  above 
names  be  less  dear  to  American  christians,  who  are  equally  under 
obligations  to  the  same  as  the  English  are.  But,  alas  !  where  is 
the  testimony  of  gratitude  exhibited  by  either  ?  George  Washington 
won  by  his  sword  the  liberties  of  the  American  States — his  mem- 
ory is  held  sacred  in  the  hearts  of  a  free  people.  Gregory  and 
Augustine,  whose  zeal  urged  them  to  bestow  on  a  race  of  pagans 
the  true  liberty  of  the  gospel,  are  ignored;  and  what  is  worse, 
by  far,  their  memories  even  insulted  in  the  presence  of  their 
spouse,  the  church  of  Christ  (the  Roman  church),  and  by  none 
more  than  you,  reverend  sir,  whose  talents  and  eloquence  are 


THE    KEY    TO    TRUE    CHRISTIANITY.  49 

never  better  displayed  than  when  your  tongue  and  pen  are  occu- 
pied in  vilHfying  and  "bearing  false  witness  against  her  who  has 
begotten  you  in  Jesus  Christ,"  and  to  whom,  as  I  have  shown 
to-day,  you  owe  whatsoever  of  Christianity  you  possess.  St.  Cyp- 
rian says,  "He  cannot  have  God  for  his  P'ather  who  has  not  the 
church  for  his  Mother,"  and  your  mother  in  the  flesh  has  no 
stronger  claim  upon  your  obedience  and  filial  love  than  the  spiritual 
mother,  whom  you  cannot  find  terms  sufficiently  harsh  to  abuse. 
She,  however,  like  her  Divine  Spouse  pendant  from  the  Cross, 
ceases  not  to  pray  for  her  ungrateful  children:  "Father  forgive 
them ;  they  know  not  what  they  do."  If  in  the  future,  you  re- 
fuse, in  your  pride,  to  recognize  your  spiritual  mother,  let  me 
conjure  you,  reverend  sir,  to  cease  your  abuse  of  her.  She  has 
had  millions  of  ungrateful  children  for  the  past  eighteen  centuries, 
who  devoted  themselves  to  the  same  occupation — they  have 
passed  away  to  receive  from  her  Spouse,  Jesus  Christ,  their  re- 
ward. But  I  have  been  unconsciously  carried  away  by  my  sym- 
pathy for  my  beloved  mother  church — how  little  do  thy  enemies 
know  thy  beauties,  my  mother !  "  But  if  ever  /  forget  thee,  O* 
Jerusalem,  let  my  right  hand  be  forgotten  !  Let  my  tongue- 
cleave  to  my  jaws  if  I  do  not  remember  thee."  But  to  resume. 
The  bible,  as  now  used  by  the  Protestants  of  this  land,  was, 
therefore,  in  fact,  the  property  of  the  Roman  church,  which  her 
missionaries  brought  with  them  from  Rome  to  Britain,  to  confirm 
their  teachings  by  its  testimonies,  and  which  was  legally  appro- 
priated, with  all  the  property  of  the  church,  in  the  beginning  of 
her  apostacy,  by  the  monster  on  the  throne  and  his  sacrilegious  rob- 
ber minions,  so  that  they  and  their  descendants  could,  with  equal 
truth  and  equally  charming  naivete  say  to  the  Catholics  of  to-day, 
as  you  have  already  said,  reverend  sir,  "Behold!  how  much  alike 
our  bibles  are!"  as  the  clerical  robber,  in  the  anecdote  above, 
could  have  said  to  my  father:  "How  much  cz^r  grain  and  hav 
resemble." 

But  you  will  say:  "Whilst  we  have  to  admit  that  Rome  gave 
us  the  present  Canon,  yet  might  we  not  have  obtained  it  from 
any  of  the  other  churches  at  that  time?"  I  answer  that  that 
would  be  impossible,  unless  from  such  churches  as  had  already 
adopted  the  Roman   Canon  ;  and  to  prove   I  am  correct  in  my 


60 


THE   KEY  TO  TKUE   CHRISTIANITY. 


reply,  I  shall  concisely  give  the  history  of  the  Roman  Canon  from 
the  time  of  its  definition  by  the  Council  of  Trent  to  its  birth,  and 
declare  myself  prepared  with  the  necessary  documents  to  main- 
tain my  statements. 

The  council  of  Trent  declared  as  canonical  or  inspired,  the 
present  Roman  bible.  That  decree  is  perfectly  identical  with 
the  canon  of  Pope  Eugenius  IV.,  A.D.  1439.  The  canon  of 
Eugenius  IV.,  which  was  taken  from  that  of  Pope  Gelasius,  in 
his  decree,  A.D.  494,  was  the  same  canon  precisely  as  that  of 
Pope  Innocent  L,  in  his  epistle  to  Exuperius,  and  also  that  of 
St.  Augu^ine,  A.D.  490  (Letter  2d,  De  Doctrina  Christiana)^ 
and  of  the  Third  Plenary  Council  of  Carthage,  celebrated  A.D. 
397,  and  of  the  council  of  Hippo,  A.D.  393.  It  is  evident  that 
the  canon  of  the  church  of  Rome  in  the  fourth  century 
was  identical  with  that  of  the  council  of  Trent  in  the  sixteenth; 
and  it  is,  besides,  evident  that  the  church  of  Africa  had  the  same 
canon  that  we  have  to-day,  and  that  she  received  it,  with  her 
faith,  from  Rome,  in  the  beginning  of  the  second  or  at  the  close 
of  the  first  century.  This  is  testified  to  by  Pope  Innocent  I., 
epistle  25th,  to  Bishop  Decentius,  by  Tertullian,  and  by  St. 
Augustine,  who  repeatedly  testifies  to  the  fact.  From  all  this, 
it  is  conclusive  that  the  present  canon  was  that  of  the  Roman 
church  at  the  close  of  the  first  century ;  and  this  is  put  beyond 
peradventure  by  the  first  epistle  of  Pope  St.  Clement,  the 
third  successor  of  St.  Peter,  and  whose  name  St.  Paul  says,  is 
written  in  the  Book  of  Life,  who,  writing  to  the  Corinthians, 
makes  mention  of,  and  quotes  from,  almost  all  the  writers  of  the 
old  and  new  testaments,  including  Wisdom,  Judith,  Ecclesiasticus 
and  the  Maccabees.  Pope  St.  Clement  makes  no  mention  of  the 
Gospel  of  St.  John,  nor  of  Revelations — hence  the  learned  con- 
clude that  the  epistle  of  Clement  was  written  before  the  destruc- 
tion of  Jerusalem  and  the  Temple,  and  the  fact  is  testified  to 
that  St.  John  had  not  written  the  Revelations  until  after  the  fall 
of  Jerusalem.  The  conclusion  is  therefore  inevitable,  that  the 
self-same  canon,  book  for  book^  which  the  Catholic  church  uses 
to-day,  is  precisely  that  which  her  Pope  St.  Clement,  the  friend 
and  companion  of  the  apostles,  testifies  to,  excepting  Revelations 
(because  it  was  not  yet  written),  and  which  only  in  the  lapse  of 


THE   KEY   TO   THUE   CHRISTIANITY.  g^ 

time  had  been  received  by  the  different  churches,  until  all  the 
churches  of  the  world  received  it  and  now  acknowledge  it — but 
which  no  particular  church  had  received  whole  and  entire  until  she 
dropped  intb  hne,  adopting  the  Roman  canon. 

I  have,  reverend  sir,  with  that  shot  I  fired  at  that  remnant  of 
the  inscription,  "  Independent  of  church  or  pope,"  carried  it  away, 
proving  its  utter  falsehood  by  the  fact  that  you  get  your  bible  from 
church  and  pope^  and  moreover,  that  it  was  an  impossibility  that 
you  could  get  it  otherwise;  for  every  particular  church  that  ever 
existed  adopted  the  canon  of  the  Roman  Church,  from  the  days 
of  Pope  St.  Clement. 

But  I  read  in  your  King  James'  edition,  that  this  bible  has  been 
translated  out  of  the  ^^  original  tongue s^'*  and  diligently  revised 
and  corrected.  High  sounding  phrases  and  calculated  to  give  as- 
surance to  the  simple  and  unwary !  Surely  we  are  not,  then,  un- 
der obligations  to  the  Roman  Catholic  church !  I  admit  that 
much  diligence  has  been  evinced  by  Protestant  biblical  scholars 
in  seeking  to  obtain  for  themselves,  and  communicate  to  others, 
knowledge  of  the  bible  in  a  philological  point  of  view;  but  could 
''the  straining  at  a  gnat  and  swallowing  a  camel"  process  be  bet- 
ter illustrated  than  in  their  efforts  ?  Instead  of  seeking  to  elevate 
the  human  character  of  the  work  which  they  fear  to  venture  on, 
and  which,  whenever  tried,  they  have  abandoned  in  despair,  they 
are  content  to  exhaust  their  energies,  groping  like  moles  in  the  dark 
recesses  of,  to  say  the  least,  equivocal  abysses,  without  the  faint- 
est hope  of  being  ever  able  to  consummate  their  work,  for  the 
simple  reason  that  they  have  improvidently  cast  from  them  the 
key  that  can  alone  unlock  the  treasures  of  God*s  riches  and  prove  them 
to  be  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost  to  man^  viz. :  that  church,  the  pillar 
and  ground  of  truth  which  fesus  Christ  commands  us  to  hear. 

But  what  is  meant  by  the  original  tongues?  Where  are  the 
original  scriptures  ?  St.  Jerome,  the  greatest  biblical  giant  that 
ever  lived,  and  who  lived  in  the  infancy  of  the  church,  could  not 
.say  in  what  language  St.  Matthew  wrote  his  Gospel,  nor  whether 
St.  Paul  wrote  to  the  Hebrews  in  Greek  or  Hebrew.  So  much 
for  any  hope  from  the  original  documents  !  The  oldest  Hebrew 
manuscript  now  in  existence  dates  back  only  to  the  eleventh 
century,  and  during  the  immense  period  intervening,  must  have 


g2  THE    KEY  TO    TEUE    CHRISTIANITY. 

gone  through  i,ooo  transcriptions,  subject  to  all  the  changes  in- 
separable from  the  ignorance,  prejudices,  carelessness  and  dis- 
honesty of  that  multitude  of  copyists.  Surely  such  a  resource  as 
this  whereon  to  build  one's  hope  of  securing  the  word  of  God 
(that  is,  when  we  have  proved  it  so)  is  pitiable  and  absurd. 

And  now  as  to  the  Greek  originals  ;  there  is  not  one  of  them  in 
existence.  The  oldest  of  the  copies  which  have  survived  the 
ravages  of  time,  is  in  the  Vatican  Library  in  Rome.  It  is  want- 
ing in  portions  of  Genesis  and  the  Psalms,  and  the  new  testa- 
ment thereof  lacks  several  of  St.  Paul's  Epistles.  The  next  in 
antiquity  begins  with  the  sixth  verse  of  the  twenty-fifth  chapter 
of  St.  Matthew,  (giving  only  three  full  chapters  thereof),  and 
lacks  some  of  St.  John's  Gospel.  The  third,  called  the 
"  Codex  Rescriptus  Ephraimi,"  is  deficient  in  many  parts  of  the 
new  testament.  The  fourth,  called  Codex  Cantabrigiencis, 
wants  also  several  parts  of  the  new  testament.  The  fifth  and 
sixth  contain  only  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul.  The  seventh,  eighth 
and  ninth  are  also  wanting  in  integrity.  The  eighth  contains 
only  the  four  gospels. 

These  are  the  sources  whence  you  seek  to  emancipate  yourself 
from  the  thraldom  of  Rome  !  this  the  result  of  the  boast  of  in- 
dependence of  church  or  Pope  !  Now  these  are  not  only  indi- 
vidually defective  as  to  parts,  but  they  are  in  many  places  in 
marked  opposition  to  each  other.  Six  out  of  the  nine  manuscripts 
belong  to  the  Catholic  church  ;  besides  it  is  impossihle  to  get  a 
copy  of  the  new  testament  out  of  them  all.  What  now  becomes 
of  the  bible  and  bible  only  .?  Now,  reverend  sir,  I  have  stated 
only  facts  in  all  this.  And  from  the  time  you  have  professed  to 
derive  your  bible  from  the  "original  tongues,"  how  have  you 
swum  without  corks }  Not  to  refer  to  any  contradictions  re- 
ferred to  in  my  last  letter,  hear  what  a  sound  and  staunch  sup- 
porter of  Protestantism  in  our  day  says  of  the  same  production 
revised,  &c.,  from  the  original  tongues !  Mr.  D'Israeli,  in  his 
"  Curiosities  of  Literature,"  says  of  English  bibles,  that  no  book 
ever  yet  swarmed  with  such  "  innumerable  errors."  Again  he 
says:  '*  One  bible  swarmed  with  six  thousand  faults."  "In 
other  bibles  we  may  find  errors  so  abundant  as  to  reduce  the 
text  to  nonsense   or  blasphemy,  and  make  the  scriptures  con- 


THE    KEY  TO    TRUE    CHRISTIANITY.  ro 

temptible."  Hear  also  what  the  bishops  and  clergy  of  England 
said  of  their  own  King  Jamea'  Bible.  "  Our  translation  takes 
from  the  text  and  adds  to  the  text ;  it  obscures  and  changes  the 
meaning  of  the  Holy  Ghost ;  it  is  a  translation  that  is  absurd 
and  senseless^  perverting  the  meaning  of  the  Holy  Ghost."  I 
hope  you  were  never  before  aware  of  all  this.  How  much 
better  had  it  been,  had  you  devoted  the  time,  labor  and  talents 
that  God  has  placed  at  your  disposal,  to  an  investigation  of  the 
foundation  oi  your  own  faith ^  rather  than  employ  the  same  in  the 
abuse  of  that  mother  who  has  begotten  you  in  Jesus  Christ  ; 
who  has  given  you  all  the  Christianity  you  possess,  and  to 
whom  you  are  indebted  (from  whatever  point  of  view  you  regard 
it)  for  the  apostolic  writings — not  the  word  of  God — for  until  you 
come  to  the  bosom  of  your  mother,  and  recognize  her  whom  St. 
Paul  calls  "  the  pillar  and  ground  of  truth,"  you  never  can  as  a 
rational  heing  know  that  you  have  the  word  of  God.  But  to 
resume. 

What  is  now  left  of  the  flag?  Where  now  is  your  indepen- 
dence of  church  and  pope  ?  Could  any  claim  be  more  worth- 
less than  yours  ?  But  you  will  say,  we  rejected  the  Apocrypha 
of  the  Old  Testament.  Tou  rejected  what  8t.  Clement  received! 
You  rejected  them  on  what  grounds  ?  Such  grounds  as  you 
furnished  in  your  last,  in  reference  to  the  Maccabees  ?  Were  I 
disposed  to  deviate  from  the  line  of  argument  laid  down,  viz.  : 
The  non-introduction  of  any  irrelevant  matter  (for  the  Catholic 
rule  of  faith  is  not  on  its  trial  but  your's  is)  I  would  riddle  to 
shreds  the  frivolous  objections  offered  especially  against  the  Mac- 
cabees, and  furnish  stronger  objections  than  you  have  done. 

The  best  reason  you  can  furnish  for  your  refusal  to  admit 
them,  is  that  given  by  the  Irish  Protestant  schoolmaster,  when 
asked  by  the  boy  why  they  (Protestants)  had  only  two  sacraments^ 
answered,  because  the  Papists  have  seven.  Never  was  illustra- 
tion more  appropriate  than  this.  Now,  reverend  sir,  before  I 
close  this  letter,  let  us  review  the  situation.  You  opened  this 
controversy  by  attempting  to  prove  that  the  bible,  as  you  pos- 
sess it,  was  and  is,  a  Divine  Revelation — this  you  proposed  to  do 
under  a  flag  bearing  the  inscription,  "  the  bible  and  bible  only, 
without  note  or  comment,  independent  of  church  or  pope .^  contains 


g^  lilt    Jv±;i    TU    TKUE    UHKISTIANITY. 

the  whole  revelation  from  God  to  man,"  and  with  what  degree 
of  success  ?  You  have  not  yet  proved  one  word  of  it  (the  excep- 
tions already  named  admitted)  to  be  other  than  the  productions 
of  the  pen  of  Matthew,  Mark,  &c.,  respectively.  You  have 
not  furnished  the  shadow  of  a  proof  of  any  interference  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  in  the  acts  of  the  writers.  You  undertook  to  estab- 
lish a  canon  !  of  what  ?  not  of  inspired  writings — for  not  a  word 
of  the  writers  has  been  proved  inspired.  On  the  contrary,  the 
flag  under  whose  folds  you  went  into  battle  has  now  came  out 
with  the  naked  stafF  and  a  meaningless  shred,  on  which  the  cu- 
rious may  be  able  to  decipher  the  words,  "without  note  or  com- 
ment," which,  if  they  have  any  meaning  at  all,  now  signify  that 
certain  writers,  eight  in  number,  wrote  after  the  departure  of 
Jesus  Christ  from  the  earth,  certain  papers  which  the  Roman 
church,  in  those  very  days,  collected  together.  In  connection 
with  the  volume  of  the  Old  Law,  and  which  she  has  ever  since 
carefully  preserved  for  reasons  highly  appreciative  to  herself,  and 
which,  together  with  much  other  valuable  property,  her  declared 
enemies  have  appropriated  without  note  or  comment^  like  the 
Episcopal  preacher  used  to  do  my  father's  crops,  but  which,  in 
their  hands,  are  comparatively  useless,  inasmuch  as  they  peremp- 
torily have  flung  away  the  key  to  the  lock  which  holds  these 
treasures,  viz.  :  The  only  unerring  witness  that  Is  competent  to 
testify  to  their  supernatural  origin  and  that  can  interpret  the  will 
of  God  contained  in  them. 

In  a  word,  you  have  had  In  your  possession  a  catalogue  or  col- 
lection of  writings  which  were  compiled  together  by  the  Roman 
Church,  which  have  ever  been  as  a  whole^  in  her  possession 
exclusively^  which  have  been  carried  with  the  Gospel  wherever 
preached  by  her  missionaries — to  which  she  alone  possesses  a 
right  claim  by  prescription — to  which  she  attributes  a  divine 
origin,  which  she  alone  can  prove  to  exist,  and  which  her  enemies 
have  no  moral  right  to  lay  claim  to,  and  which,  when  in  the 
hands  of  her  enemies,  no  matter  how  well-disposed  otherwise,  is 
a  non-descript  being,  neither  human  nor  divine — a  ship  without  rud- 
der or  compass,  a  law  without  a  judge  or  interpreter,  a  teacher 
that  never  yet  uttered  a  syllable  of  instruction,  and  an  oracle 
whose  lips  have  never  yet  opened,  but  who,  (if  what  the  wor- 
shippers at  her  shrine  say  be  true)  not  only  when  consulted,  speaks 


THE    KEY  TO    TRUE    CHRISTIANITY. 


55 


ambiguously,  but  delivers  herself  of  innumerable  contradictions  ; 
witness  the  countless  sects  that  profess  to  derive  their  inspira- 
tion, mutually  contradictory  of  each  other,  from  her  lips,  whilst 
in  fact,  her  lips  are  a  sealed  hook  unless  to  her,  who  is  both  her 
witness  and  interpreter. 

Respectfully,  &c., 

M.  O'KEEFE. 


SCENE. — On  the  banks  of  the  Elizabeth,  at  the  "  City  by  the 
Sea." — Dramatis  per  some — Jack  and  George,  amateur  fishermen. 

Jack. — Say,  George,  got  tired  of  this  'ere  fishin'  for  "inspira- 
tions," as  the  old  fellow  called  them  ?  For  my  part,  I  ain't  goin* 
to  stand  this  any  longer. 

George. — Guess,  Jack,  if  we  go  on  at  this  rate  we'll  never 
catch  a  "canon,"  that's  what  he  calls  a  string  of  this  'ere  fish. 

Jack. — Wonder  how  the  old  fellow  himself  succeeded  as  a 
fisherman  of  "inspirations?"      Did  he  ever  catch  a  "canon?" 

George. — Guess  he  caught  a  Tartar  lately  :  he  came  in  con- 
tact with  a  Catholic  Priest  about  this  'ere  thing,  and  they  say  the 
Priest  is  "  fetching  him  up  "  with  a  round  turn. 

Jack. — I  have  noticed  that  all  through  life  some  people  are 
not  satisfied  with  getting  along  quietly,  but  are  all  the  time,  like 
the  Irishman  at  Donnybrook  Fair,  asking  some  gintleman  or 
other  to  oblige  him  by  treading  on  the  tail  of  his  coat. 

George. — Such  gents  as  these  are  spoilin'  for  a  fight,  till  some 
one  at  last  gets  even  with  them.  But  I'm  tired.  I  believe  that 
man  imagined  these  'ere  fish.     I  don't  believe  they  exist  anyhow. 

Jack. — You're  mistaken  about  that,  George,  the  good  book 
says  there  was  an  old  fisherman  named  Peter,  out  of  whose  boat 
the  Master  fished,  and  that  the  Lord  gave  him  and  his  descend- 
ants the  patent-right  to  catch  the  canon,  and  that  that  family 
alone  know  how  to  catch,  dress,  and  prepare  for  the  table,  this 
'ere  fish,  in  short  order:  for  the  Lord  showed  them  himself  how 
to  fix  it,  and  they  have  been  using  this  'ere  inspiration,  for  bait, 
ever  since,  and  the  shoals  of  all  kinds  of  fish  that  they  catch  with 
this  'ere  bait  is  wonderful.  It  is  a  family  secret — there's  no  one 
but  the  Lord  and  themselves  in  it. 


56  THE  KEY  TO  TRUE  CHRISTIANITY. 

George. — Jack,  why  didn't  you  tell  me  this  before  ?  I  don'l 
believe  that  man  knew  what  he  was  talking  about.  Anyhow, 
they  say  that  the  Priest,  who  is  one  of  old  Peter's  household,  is 
ROW  showing  him  a  thing  or  two  about  this  'ere  fishing  for  "  in- 
spiration."    I'm  fagged  out ;   let's  haul  in  our  lines. 

Jack. —  "  Barkis  is  willin' :  "  here  goes;  my  bait  is  just  as  I 
threw  it  out — not  a  nibble. 

George. — Jack  !  come  here  !  my  hook  has  got  somethin' — 
guess  by  the  weight  I  have  got  a  whole  "  canon.*'  Let's  haul 
in  carefully. 

Jack. — George,  what's  that  'ere  spar  got  to  do  with  your 
*'  canon  ?  "  it's  comin'  in  with  the  rest. 

George. — Look  here  !  I've  got  an  old  rag  tagged  on  to  my 
hook  and  that  spar  is  tagged  on  to  the  rag.  Let's  get  it  ashore 
anyhow.  Look  here  !  there's  something  printed  on  it.  '^'^  With- 
out note  or  comment'*  Now  I've  got  it — that's  all's  left  of  the 
flag  under  which  the  Preacher  fought  the  Priest.  My  !  what  a 
riddling  !   don't  saucy  boys  get  dirty  jackets  ? 

Jack. — George  !  If  I  had  known  this  'ere  thing  long  ago,  I 
shouldn't  to-day  be  losing  my  time  and  patience,  fishing  for 
"inspirations"  with  that  bait.  If  we  want  to  succeed,  George, 
there's  only  one  way  to  do  it.  Let's  see  what  the  representative 
of  old  Peter  has  got  to  say  about  it.  "  Live  and  learn  "  is  my 
motto  hereafter.  What's  to  be  done  with  this  "  relic  of  old 
decency  ?  "  We  have  no  further  use  for  it.  Inspiration  under 
Peter's  teaching  or  rationalism  hereafter  for  me. 

George. — Farewell !  old  reHc  !  Jack  and  I  are  going  for  bait 
to  Peter's  man.     Exeunt  George  and  Jack. 


THE   KEY    TO   TKUE   CHRISTIANITY. 


67 


NORFOLK,   SEPTEMBER  9,  1872. 
REV.  J.  D.  BLACKWELL,  D.  D. 

How  dost  til',  I  say,  adventure  thus 

T'  oppose  thy  lumber  against  us  ? 

Could  thine  impertinence  find  out 

No  work  to  employ  itself  about. 

Where  then  secure  from  wooden  blow, 

Thy  busy  vanity  might  show  ? 

Was  no  dispute  afoot  between 

The  Caterwauling  brethern? 

No  subtle  question  raised  among 

Those  out-o' -their  wits,  and  those  i'  the  wrong? 

— Uudihras,  Canto  2d. 

Dear  Sir  :  Your  letter  has  just  come  to  hand.  I  hasten  to 
reply.  Its  first  sentence  Is  couched  in  the  following  terms : 
"  As  your  letters  are  chiefly  replies,  not  to  the  articles  of  mine 
they  immediately  follow,  but  to  the  preceding  ones,  &c."  In 
the  language  of  the  outraged  lawyer:  "I  deny  the  allegation  and 
defy  the  alligator"  to  the  proof.  Take  for  instance  my  last  let- 
ter :  Is  not  the  greater  part  of  one  column  devoted  to  an  expo- 
sure of  the  inconsecutiveness  of  your  last?  Have  I  not  therein 
expressed  my  own  disappointm.ent,  and  that  of  the  public  at  your 
utter  failure,  in  that  letter,  to  meet  our  wishes  and  comply  with 
the  terms  of  a  compact  which  you  advisedly  and  deliberately 
made  with  me  in  the  presence  of  more  than  thirty  thousand  peo- 
ple ?  And  yet  you,  in  the  face  of  these  facts,  make  the  above 
assertion!  Sure  the  cause  must  be  "/«  extremis^*  that  requires 
such  "dodging"  as  this. 

And  the  public  are,  to-day,  treated  to  a  disquisition  on  the  In- 
spiration of  the  scriptures,  impregnably  fortified  by  the  "reserves" 
that  were  so  long  coming  up  !  Ah  !  reverend  sir,  you  were  pre- 
paring a  surprise  for  your  friends  and  the  public!  You  have 
been  marshaling  the  reserves  for  the  final  blow,  all  this  time, 
and  now  surely  they  are  forthcoming  !  Alas  !  -we  are  once  more 
doomed  to  disappointment.  We  are  treated  this  morning  to  a 
lengthy  article  on  the  right  of  private  judgment  to  interpret  and 
discuss,  ad  infinitum^  the  writings  of  Matthew,  Mark,  Paul, 
Luke,  and  their  fellow-writers,  as  you  possess  the  right  to  in- 
terpret Livy,  Xenophon  or  any  other  writer.     You  might  have 


53  THE    KEY  TO  TRUE    CHRISTIANITY. 

saved  yourself  all  that  trouble.  Your  right  was  conceded  before 
you  began.  But  when  you  claim  the  right  to  interpret  the  above 
writings  as  a  joint  result  of  the  spirit  of  God  and  the  writers, 
this  is  something  else.  It  will  be  first  necessary  to  prove  the 
participation  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  the  works  of  these  writers  be- 
fore you  constitute  yourself  the  mirror  through  which  the  Divine 
mind  manifests  itself.  You  have  undertaken  in  your  usually 
logical  (?)  way,  to  cook  your  hare  before  you  caught  him. 

But  I  ask,  in  the  name  of  reason  and  common  sense,  has  your 
respect  for  the  intelligence  of  this- community  been  reduced  to  so 
low"  an  ebb,  are  you  so  utterly  regardless  of  what  you  owe  them 
as  to  be  induced  to  believe  that  you  can  thus  persistently  evade 
the  question  after  this  fashion  ?  For  my  part,  as  an  honest  man, 
rather  than  be  guilty  of  such  tactics,  I  should  honestly  throw 
down  my  arms,  acknowledge  manfully  my  defeat,  and  be  the 
first  to  congratulate  my  opponent  on  his  success. 

However,  to  keep  my  readers  posted  constantly  on  the  current 
phase  of  this  discussion,  it  is  necessary  once  more  to  summarize. 

On  the  28th  July,  you  wrote  me  to  this  effect :  "You  may 
select  the  first  subject  of  debate — as  soon  as  you  choose  the 
medium  through  which  we  will  address  the  public,  you  shall 
have  my  reply."  So  far  honest  and  straightforward.  Next  day's 
Virginian  brought  you  the  following,  consequent  on  the  above 
invitation  : 

"As  you  give  me  the  choice  of  the  first  subject  to  be  discussed, 
1  choose  the  bible.  My  reason  for  so  doing  is  this  :  I  have  an 
idea  that  the  war-cry  of  the  bible  and  bible  only,  without  note 
or  comment,  cannot  be  sustained  ;  hence  before  I  could  consent 
that  you  quote  it  as  the  word  of  God,  (although  perfectly  willing 
that  you  do  so  as  a  genuine,  truthful  narrative  of  such  events  as 
it  treats  of)  you  will  have  to  prove  your  right  to  do  so,  as  I  did, 
before  you  attack  any  doctrine  of  the  Catholic  church.  You 
will  therefore,  proceed  to  show:  ist.  The  divine  inspiration  of 
the  bible,  in  other  words,  that  it  is  not  a  human,  but  divine  pro- 
duction. 2d.  You  will  please  establish  your  canon  of  the  scrip- 
tures. 3d.  You  will  vindicate  the  right  to  interpret,  ivhat  you 
have  already  proved  to  he  the  word  of  God^  by  private  judgment. 
These  points  being  satisfactorily  demonstrated^  I  am  prepared  unequivo- 
cally to  admit  your  right  to  the  scriptures  as  "the  word  of  God,'* 


KEY   TO    TEUE    CHRISTIANITY. 


69 


and  to  sustain  ?.ny  doctrine  of  the  Catholic  church,  which  you 
may  feel  disposed  to  assail." 

This  programme  of  points  for  debate  was  implicitly  accepted 

by  you,  as  your  letter    of  the plainly    indicates.      A  letter 

bearing  that  date,  ostensibly  written  in  proof  of  the  inspiration  of 
the  Scriptures  from  your  point  of  view,  but  which  was  filled  with 
vituperation  against  your  bete  noir — the  Catholic  church,  con- 
tained, at  its  fag-end,  an  attempt  to  prove  the  inspiration  from  a 
three-fold  point  of  view.  These  proofs  were  successively  dis- 
posed of  in  my  subsequent  letter,  and  no  attempt  has  since  been 
made  to  resurrect  them.  These  were  the  only  proofs  ever  brought. 
A  statement  made  by  you  in  a  subsequent  letter  contained  the 
following:  "The  public  will,  of  course,  understand  that  I  do 
not  propose  to  offer  such  proofs  on  the  subject  as  I  would  pre- 
sent to  a  class  of  students  or  a  set  of  skeptics." 

Must  I  alas  !  once  more  find  it  necessary  to  remind  you  of 
the  terms  of  your  contract  with  me  and  the  public  ?  Have  you 
yet  advanced  one  step  towards  the  fulfilment  of  them  ?  Where 
are  the  proofs  for  the  inspiration  of  the  Scriptures  ?  I  must  pre- 
sume still  that  you  spoke  truthfully  when  you  wrote  the  above 
sentence.  Have  you  read  my  last  letter  on  this  point  ?  What 
can  be  thought  of  one  who  deliberately  ignores  a  public  compact 
he  makes  in  presence  of  thirty  thousand  people  and  more  ?  and 
what  savors  of  the  deepest  treachery  towards  his  cause — his  own 
word  being  pledged  for  the  existence  of  these  proofs  and  their 
availability,  he,  in  the  midst  of  the  conflict,  and  with  a  most  dis- 
astrous defeat  staring  him  in  the  face,  and  inevitably  too,  refuses 
doggedly  to  bring  forth  those  reserves  that,  perhaps,  would  turn 
the  tide  of  fortune  ?  Never  in  the  history  of  polemics  was  a 
combatant  so  impaled  !  and  after  all  that  was  written  on  this  sub- 
ject in  my  last — enough  to  galvanize  into  life  the  last  breath  of 
a  sensitive  dying  man — we  are  favored  to-day — not  with  the 
proofs  for  inspiration — but  with  an  exhausting  (not  exhaustive) 
argument  on  the  right  to  interpret  the  apostolic  writers  as  each 
one  pleases. 

Now,  reverend  sir,  think  you  that  I  could  be  induced  to  fol- 
low you  in  this  irregular  proceeding  ?  You  know  me  better  now 
than  to  make  me  particeps  criminis  of  a  procedure  so  utterly  illog- 
ical.     I  admonished  you  long  since  that  I   neither  would  reply 


QQ  THE    KEY  TO    TRUE    CHRISTIANITY. 

to  any  irrelevant  matter,  nor  sanction  Its  introduction  In  the  dis- 
cussion, and  this  course  I  have  invariably  observed.  But  you 
mistake,  very  much,  the  character  of  the  public,  if  you  think 
that  this  awkward  attempt  to  hoodwink  them  will  avail  you  any- 
thing in  the  exercise  of  your  cuttle-fish  tactics.  They  under- 
stand that  the  first  Instalment  of  your  contract  consisted  in  prov- 
ing that  the  Holy  Ghost  was  the  author,  in  part,  of  the  apos- 
•tolic  writings,  and  they  understand,  too,  that  the  first  effort  you 
made  to  do  so  proved  such  a  failure  that  you  never  tried  it  again, 
although  they  read  your  declaration  that  you  hold  proofs  in  reserve 
for  a  "  class  of  students  or  a  set  of  skeptics.'*  Imagine  us,  rev- 
erend sir,  either  one  or  the  other,  or  both,  and,  for  my  part,  I 
will  pledge  myself  to  hear  with  docility  and  respect  the  words  of 
wisdom  at  the  feet  of  our  new  Gamaliel. 

We  expect,  reverend  sir,  that  as  an  honest  man,  you  will  keep 
to  the  terms  of  your  contract,  and  that  as  a  truthful  man,  you 
will  keep  your  word  pledged  in  the  presence  of  the  "twin  cities," 
and  the  numerous  other  readers  of  the  Virginian.  Were  I  In 
your  place,  the  sun  should  not  set  to-morrow  before  either  my 
candid  acknowledgment  of  defeat,  or  the  proofs  for  inspiration  (if 
they  exist),  should  be  before  the  eyes  of  the  people.  Never  in 
my  life  have  I  been  more  earnest  and  sincere  than  in  this  state- 
ment. What  a  mockery  !  Does  your  cause  require  this  course 
of  conduct  ?  If  so,  then  let  the  cause  go,  that  would  demand  at 
your  hands  a  sacrifice  of  your  manhood  ;  if  not,  then  redeem  the 
cause  from  the  imputation  that  now  naturally  rests  on  it,  by  ac- 
knowledging your  inability  to  advance  one  step.  Reverend  sir,  let 
me  appeal  to  you  to  forbear  this  course  of  proceeding.  The  far- 
ther you  go  on  in  this  track  the  more  you  are  losing  caste  amongst 
men. 

Throw  down  your  arms,  acknowledge  the  futility  of  your 
eff'orts  to  sustain  a  system  that  I  predicted  never  could  be  main- 
tained. Other  heads  far  more  gifted  than  yours  have  abandoned 
the  effort  in  despair,  and  you  will  not  be  disgraced  by  yielding 
honorably  to  the  necessities  of  the  case.  I  speak  the  simple 
truth  when  I  say  it  grieves  me  to  be  obliged  to  write  publicly  thus  tcf 
one  whose  friends  speak  in  high  terms  of  his  qualities  of  head  and 
heart.  But  I  must  expose  what  I  feel  and  know  to  be  anything 
but  fair  dealing.     There  is  one  feature  of  your  letter  of  the  3d 


THE    KEY  TO    TRUE    CHRISTIANITY.  Q^ 

ich  I  overlooked,  but  which  I  deem  worthy  of  advert- 
ence, inasmuch  as  it  bears  on  the  inspiration  of  the  scriptures, 
the  only  legitimate  question  under  discussion^  viz.  :  You  find  fault 
with  my  reasoning  or  logic  when  I  say,  "There  was  no  command 
to  write,  and  the  proof  of  this  is  that  the  majority  of  them  did 
not  write."  Now,  reverend  sir,  I  repeat  the  expression  and  pro- 
ceed to  prove  it :  The  command  to  write  (if  such  exist,  and 
which  must  be  proved  by  testimony),  was  written  as  a  general 
order  or  as  one  confined  to  some  of  the  apostles  in  particular. 
If  a  general  command,  then  the  majority  disobeyed  it,  for  they 
did  not  write  ;  are  you  prepared  for  this  conclusion,  viz.  :  that  the 
majority  of  the  apostles  disobeyed  the  command  of  God  ?  If  the 
command  was  limited  to  some  of  the  apostles  distinct  from  the 
body,  that  can  only  be  known  by  testimony,  viz.  :  either  by  the 
words  of  Christ  giving  the  command,  or  by  the  declaration  of 
the  apostles  themselves  ;  and  as  the  burden  of  proof  rests  on  you, 
and  as  you  have  declared  that  Christ  directed  the  apostles  to  write, 
adduce  your  proofs.  Otherwise  my  proposition  remains  intact, 
viz.  :  There  was  no  command  to  write,  and  the  proof  of  this  is 
that  the  majority  did  not  write. 

Meanwhile,  whilst  awaiting  the  reinforcements  with  all  the 
equanimity  at  my  disposal,  I  shall  take  a  new  departure,  and 
accepting  for  the  present  the  (to  me)  new  Shibboleth,  viz. :  the 
bible  and  bible  only,  without  note  or  comment,  independent  of 
Pope  or  church,  contains  all  things  essential  to  salvation,  or  more 
concisely,  according  to  your  great  champion,  Chillingworth,  "the 
bible  is  the  religion  of  protestants."  I  join  issue  with  you,  and 
now  deliberately  and  in  full  possession  of  my  mental  faculties  de- 
clare that  if  either  proposition  (yours  or  Chillingworth's)  be  true, 
a  greater  imposition  than  the  system  whereby  Christianity  was 
propagated  never  existed ;  whilst  on  the  other  hand,  if  the  Re- 
deemer adopted  for  the  propagation  of  Christianity  a  system  that 
absolutely  excludes  from  its  precincts  all  contact  with  the  bible, 
"the  rehgion  of  protestants,"  then  the  latter  system  Is  an  impo- 
sition practically  ignored  by  Jesus  Christ.  The  latter  division 
of  this  disjunctive  proposition  I  shall  now  proceed  to  demonstrate. 

For  the  purpose  of  aiding  more  effectually  the  investigation  I 
will  respectfully  Invite  you  to  accompany  me  down  the  stairs  of 
time,  to  take  a  peep  into  the  dim  vista  of  the  past.     In  order  to 


Q2  THE   KEY  TO   TRUE   CHRISTIANITY 

be  well  provided  for  the  journey,  it  is  necessary  to  take  with  us 
a  good  supply  of  "  independence  of  church  and  pope"  sandwiched 
by  Chillingworth's  "  Bible,  the  Religion  of  Protestants,"  and  a  good 
biblical  lantern  and  matches,  to  light  us  down  the  steps  repre- 
sented by  the  "dark  ages,"  with  a  keen  and  ever  vivid  sense  of 
appreciation  of  what  "  our  religion,  the  bible,"  has  done  for  Chris- 
tianity since  Christ  directed  it  to  be  written.  Jllons  !  Messieurs! 
Let  me  precede,  for  I  happen  to  be  acquainted  all  the  way.  I 
have  a  talisman,  the  sign  of  the  cross,  which  is  calculated,  even 
as  we  pass  through  the  "dark  ages,"  to  do  us  service.  Be  care- 
ful how  you  tread  the  first  step,  for  it  is  not  yet  completed. 
Now  we  have  touched  the  eighteenth  step  and  so'  on  for  several 
others — we  are  approaching  the  steps  of  the  dar|£  ages — have  the 
matches  and  lantern  in  readiness  !  At  last,  we  have  descended 
to  the  fifteenth  from  the  top  safely.  We  will  now  rest  awhile 
here,  and  in  the  city  of  Rome  (A.  D.  313)  we  witness  the  trium- 
phal entry  of  the  youthful  Emperor  Constantlne  with  his  victorious 
army,  preceded  by  the  labarum  "/«  hoc  s'lgno  vinces,'^ 

In  his  imperial  edict  he  grants  freedom  of  worship  to  the 
christians.  Immediately  after  his  arrival  he  pays  his  respects  to 
St.  Melchiades,  the  then  Pope,  of  whom  St.  Augustine  afterwards 
wrote  :  An  excellent  man  !  true  son  of  peace  !  true  father  of  the 
christian  people!  Since  peace  is  now  restored  and  Christianity 
now  recognized  by  that  mammoth  power  that  rules  the  destiny 
of  the  world.  We  will  look  round  and  seek  to  collect  some  in- 
formation regarding  the  condition  of  Christianity  for  the  past 
(nearly)  300  years.  For  this  purpose  we  will  obtain  a  reliable 
and  intelligent  christian  guide,  whose  ancestry  in  the  blood  and  in 
the  faith  gloriously  spilt  their  blood  in  the  amphitheatre,  to  the 
cry  of  "  Christiani  ad  leones.'*  "  Christians  to  the  lions."  We 
invite  our  guide  to  conduct  us  to  the  catacombs  where  the  bones 
of  millions  of  martyrs  and  confessors  have  been  accumulating  for 
nearly  three  centuries.  We  enter  the  amphitheatre  whereof  the 
soil  for  inches  deep  is  ensanguined  by  their  blood.  Our  guide, 
in  the  exuberance  of  his  joy,  tells  us  that  an  edict  of  the  Emperor 
transforms  the  pagan  temples  into  christian  churches,  so  that  no 
longer  hunted  into  the  deep  recesses  of  caverns,  the  light  of  God's 
sun  is  about  to  shed  its  first  beams  upon  altars  erected  to  the 
glory  of  the  Maker  of  all  things,  in  the  new  sanctuaries.     Natu- 


THE    KEY  TO   TKUE   UHRISTIANITT  gg 

rally  you  extol  in  eloquent  tones  the  superhuman  faith  attested  to 
by  the  piles  of  martyr  bones,  you  sympathize  with  the  thousands 
of  maimed  and  scarred  confessors  of  the  christian  faith  whom  you 
meet  everywhere  and  who  carry  on  their  persons  the  marks  of 
their  sufferings  for  the  christian  name.  You  hear  from  the  lips 
of  thousands,  of  the  agonies  endured  by  their  own  parents,  brothers, 
sisters,  friends,  in  the  last  persecution,  and  they  point  out  with  a 
natural  sadness,  but,  nevertheless,  with  an  eye  lustrous  with 
supernatural  triumph,  to  the  bones  of  those  dear  ones  who  joy- 
fully poured  out  blood  and  life  for  that  persecuted  religion,  almost 
without  cessation,  since  the  days  of  the  martyrdom  of  Peter  and 
Paul.  They  will  also  point  with  pride  and  reverence  to  where 
the  glorious  apostles  rest,  where  the  martyred  successors  of  Peter, 
in  the  chair  of  Rome,"  sleep  their  last  sleep,"  and  countless  other 
objects  of  interest  which  fill  the  christian  heart  with  a  heavenly 
joy  and  pride,  and  gratitude  to  God,  who  gave  the  grace  of  per- 
severance to  eleven  millions  of  witnesses  to  his  name  and  doc- 
trines. 

You  will,  also,  whilst  offering  your  felicitations  to  the  survivors 
of  the  tragedy  of  nearly  300  years  duration,  instructed  as  you 
have  been,  naturally  descant  on  the  power  and  blessings  of  the 
gospel  illustrated  in  the  suff'erings  of  its  children,  all  over  the 
empire,  for  so  many  generations,  and  being  naturally  anxious  to 
secure  a  copy  of  that  new  testament  which  furnished,  through 
its  pages,  to  'the  martyr  and  confessor,  so  much  instruction, 
strength,  hope  and  consolation,  you  ask  where  you  could  pur- 
chase a  bible  as  a  relic  of  these  glorious  days.  Probably  you 
could  secure  one  whose  pages  or  cover  is  spattered  with  the  blood 
of  one  or  other  of  these  glorious  martyrs ;  what  a  treasure. 
What  a  cherished  memento  of  this  glorious  epoch  !  But  in  reply 
to  your  request,  what  do  you  hear  ?  We  have  never  seen  or  heard 
anything  whereof  you  ask.  JVe  have  never  seen  a  bible.  What  ? 
Was  it  not  the  bible  that  gave  force  and  character  to  the  grand 
struggles  and  imparted  victory  to  Christianity  at  length  ?  They 
repeat  their  answer.  TVe  know  not  tuhat  you  refer  to ;  it  never  had 
existence  for  us.  You  remonstrate  against  such  an  assertion  as 
this,  and  tell  your  informant  in  the  words  of  the  immortal  Chil- 
lingworth,  "the  bible  is  the  religion  of  protestants."  They 
assure  you  that  that  may  be  so,  but  that  neither  they  nor  the 


I 


g4  THE   KEY  TO   TRUE   CHRISTIANITY. 

eleven  millions  of  their  martyred  co-believers  ever  saw  one ;  that 
such  a  book  neither  had  nor  has  existence^  and  that  the  only  way  in 
which  they  received  that  faith  which  sustained  them  in  over- 
coming all  the  ingenuity  of  diabolical  malice,  was  throuo-h  the 
voice  of  their  pastors,  who  invariably  instructed  them  by  word  of 
mouthy  as  they  were  themselves  instructed  ;  that,  now  and  then, 
in  some  places,  certain  letters,  or  points  thereof,  purporting  to 
to  have  been  written  by  some  of  the  apostles  or  their  companions, 
and  containing  some  excellent  christian  counsel,  would  be  read 
to  them  by  their  pastors,  but  that  so  many  spurious  writings  were 
in  circulation,  no  one  could  feel  assured  of  their  genuineness  or 
authenticity  j  that  the  rule  of  teaching  was  oral^  that  they  derived 
their  faith  (that  faith  that  was  always  dearer  to  them  than  their 
lives)  from  the  living  voice  of  their  pastors  exclusively.  You  look 
with  amazement  on  your  informants,  you  are  shocked  at  the 
glaring  contradiction  between  your  life-long  views  and  their 
statements,  you  cannot  reconcile  them.  What !  millions  to  have 
given  their  lives  for  the  faith  of  Christ  (and  this  for  nearly  ten 
generations)  who  never  saw  a  bible  !  You  question  others,  and 
what  you  have  already  heard  is  only  confirmed  the  more. 

You  again  remonstrate  that  "  the  bible  is  the  religion  of  protest- 
ants;'^  they  politely  assure  you  that  they  do  not  at  all  seek  to 
contradict  your  statement ;  but  they  assure  you  also,  that  their 
ancestors,  for  300  years  nearly,  were  christians  of  the  first  water, 
and  prodigally  poured  out  blood  and  life  for  their  faith  without 
any  aid  from  any  such  source.  They  declare  that  their  pastors 
had  always  taught  them  that  Jesus  Christ,  their  Redeemer,  sent 
His  apostles,  after  having  instructed  them  Himself  in  all  things, 
to  teach,  by  word  of  mouth,  others,  whom  they  chose  for  that 
same  office  of  teaching,  who,  with  them,  would  transmit  all  these 
truths^  by  word  of  mouthy  to  their  successors,  and  that  these  paral- 
lel lines  of  teachers  and  taught  have  been  transmitted  perpetually 
for  ten  generations  with  the  promise  of  Jesus  Christ,  that  this 
arrangement  of  His,  will,  under  His  superintendence  continue 
practically  to  do  its  work  to  the  end  of  the  world  ;  that  there  has 
existed  no  other  than  this  for  300  years,  and  that  what  you  tell 
them  of  the  bible  being  the  religion  of  protestants  may  be  very 
well,  but  that  they  never  heard  of  one  or  the  other,  and  that  your 
notions  on  such  matters  are  all  "Greek"  to  them;  that  for  their 


THE    KEY    TO    TRUE    CHRISTIANITY. 


65 


part,  they  know  of  no  teacher  but  the  teacher  created  by  Jesus 
Christ,  His  church,  whose  visible  head  is  to-day  Melchiades,  the 
thirty-second  successor  of  St.  Peter,  who  has  just  barely  escaped 
martyrdom  through  the  victory  of  Constantine,  and  who  can  to- 
day be  found  in  the  Vatican,  having  been  installed  there  by  the 
Empress  Fausta,  who  cheerfully  gave  up  her  palace  to  the  high 
priest  of  the  Roman  Empire  and  of  the  christian  world.  Facts 
are  stubborn  things,  and  there  is  now  no  remedy  and  no  escape 
from  the  conviction  that  the  golden  era  of  Christianity,  during 
which  eleven,  millions  of  christians  were  baptized  a  second  time 
in  their  blood,  was  utterly  devoid  of  a  single  copy  of  the  bible  ! 
What  a  loss  !  what  benighted  ignorance  !  what  an  oversight  in 
the  Redeemer !  surely  these  glorious  martyrs  and  confessors  de- 
served to  have,  at  least,  a  nice  little  pocket  edition  to  carry  about 
with  them,  and  yet  our  Lord  deprived  them  of  this  comfort.  He 
left  them  in  utter  ignorance  of  the  existence  of  "the  bible,  the 
religion  of  pro  es.ants,"  while  they  were,  for  300  years,  pouring 
out  their  life-blood  for  His  name  and  the  truth  of  His  teachings. 
It  is  incomprehensible  how  the  Redeemer  could  have  done  so  (on 
biblical  principles),  yet  the  fact  is  undeniable,  that  He  entrusted 
the  teaching  of  mankind  to  a  number  of  men  who,  without  a  hible^ 
transmitted  His  doctrine  to  scores  of  millions,  who  proved  the 
excellency  of  their  faith  by  the  sacrifice  of  their  lives  ("  by  their 
fruits  you  shall  know  them.")  This  is  a  lesson,  reverend  sir, 
that  we  will  take  home  with  us.  It  will  excite  in  our  minds  a 
grave  suspicion  that  "  the  ways  of  God  are  not  your  ways"  in 
this  very  important  matter,  at  least. 

But  there  is  another  question  of  importance  that  we  will  have 
to  see  after,  whilst  here.  The  last  letter  I  wrote  you,  took  away 
all  legitimate  right  and  title  to  the  new  testament.  It  is  un- 
equivocally the  property  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  where  we  now 
are,  and  as  we  desire  to  be  independent  of  church  or  pope,  we 
must,  whilst  in  the  Empire,  collect  together  all  the  available 
material  that  can  be  found  in  this  year  (313)  so  that  when  we 
return  home,  we  may,  as  biblical  students,  separate  out  of  the 
number,  what  is  spurious  from  what  is  genuine,  what  is  inspired 
from  what  is  not  so.  In  this  way  we  will  secure  to  ourselves  a 
true  copy  of  God's  word  for  future  generations,  and  thus  instead 
of  sponging  on  church  and  pope  as  we  have  been  doing  for  300 


66 


THE  KEY  TO  TRUE  CHRISTIANITY. 


years,  we  will  have  our  own  bible  from  the  hands  of  those  chris- 
tians scattered  over  the  broad  extent  of  the  Roman  Empire, 
through  which  we  must  travel  to  collect  all  the  material  available 
to  us.     (A.  D.  313.) 

As  this  tour  of  ours  is  of  course  one  of  imagination  only,  it  is 
only  necessary  to  state  that  ecclesiastical  writers  of  the  four  first 
centuries  mention  seventy-one  Gospels,  Acts,  Epistles,  and  Reve- 
lations which  have  perished.  During  our  sojourn,  however,  in 
the  Roman  Empire  we  have,  at  greafcost  and  with  much  fatigue 
and  journeying  secured  for  ourselves  the  following,  which  are  to- 
day extant,  and  from  which  we  can  select  our  canon  independently 
of  church  or  pope. 

There  are  nine  Gospels  now  in  existence,  viz. : 

Two  of  Matthew. 

One  of  St.  James,  the  Less,  Bishop  of  Jerusalem. 

Two  of  the  Infancy  of  Jesus  Christ,  attributed  to  St.  Thomas. 

One  of  St.  John. 

One  of  St.  Mark. 

One  of  St.  Luke. 

One  of  Nicodemus. 

There  are  in  existence  to-day  three  works,  entitled  Acts  of  the 
Apostles : 

Qjie  by  St.  Luke. 

Two  by  Paul  and  Thecla. 

Of  Epistles  there  are  the  following  now  extant : 
Fifteen  of  St.  Paul,  the  Epistle  to  the  Laodiceans  thrown  out 
by  the  Catholic  church,  for  reasons  satisfactory  to  her,  and 
whom  protestantism  has  servilely  followed  in  this  particular,  with- 
out knowing  why,  although  the  apostle  expressly  mentions  the 
same  epistle  in  his  Epistle  to  the  Colossians,  and  commands  it  to 
be  read  by  them.  This  epistle  is  in  existence  to-day,  and  there 
is  high  protestant  authority  for  its  genuineness,  yet  it  is  excluded 
from  the  canon.      Can  this  be  explained  ? 

Two  Epistles  of  Peter. 
Three  "  of  John. 
One  "  of  Jude. 
Two        "       of  Clement  to  the  Corinthians. 

(This  is  the  Clement  whose  name,  St.  Paul  says,  is  written  In 
the   Book  of  Life.     Why  his  two  epistles  should  be  rejected, 


THE    KEY  TO   TRUE   CHRISTIANITY.  Q'j 

whilst  the  gospels  of  Mark  and  Luke  should  be  received,  ought 
to  be  carefully  ascertained.) 

One  Epistle  of  St.  Barnabas,  an  apostle,  whose  epistle  is  not 
in  the  canon,  whilst  the  writings  of  Mark  and  Luke,  no  apostles, 
are  to  be  found  there.     This,  too,  deserves  attention. 

Six  Epistles  of  Ignatius  to  the  Ephesians,  Magnesians,  Tral- 
lians,  Romans,  Philadelphians  and  Smyrnaens. 

One  Epistle  of  Polycarp.* 
One        "       of  Polycarp  to  the  Phillippians. 
One  Book  of  Hermas  called  the  Visions. 
Two  Books  of  Hermas  called  the  Commands. 
Three     "  "  "        Simihtudes. 

Finally,  the  Revelations  of  St.  John. 

Behold  the  existing  material  wherewith  to  provide  a  canon  ! 
all  these  are  now  at  hand  to  furnish  the  "  Lex  scripta  "  of  biblical 
christians  "independently  of  church  or  pope."  No  borrowed 
material  after,  this,  especially  from  an  institution  that  apostatized 
from  the  truth  centuries  ago ! 

Let  us  take  a  glance  at  the  nine  gospels  left  us.  As  Mark 
and  Luke  were  not  apostles,  I  should  prefer  giving  precedence  to 
the  Gospel  of  James,  who  wrote  the  Proto-evangelion  (which  is 
within  a  few  inches  of  the  hand  that  pens  these  lines),  it  was 
regarded  as  genuine,  and  was  pubhcly  read  as  canonical  in  the 
Eastern  churches.  In  your  investigation,  you  will  consider  that 
James  was  the  kinsman  of  our  Lord,  hence  his  gospel  ought  surely 
take  precedence  of  those  of  A4ark  and  Luke.  Again  the  gospel  of 
Nicodemus,  let  me  say  a  word  or  two  in  his  behalf.  He  was  a 
good  man,  beloved  by  our  Lord,  and  the  gospel  was  believed  to 
have  been  written  by  him.  After  you  have  convinced  yourself 
of  its  genuineness,  give  it  a  place  in  your  canon.  Don't  over- 
look the  Gospels  of  the  Infancy,  attributed  to  St.  Thomas. 
Why  it  looks,  after  all,  as  if  all  the  apostles  had  written,  and 
perhaps,  too,  by  the  command  of  Jesus  Christ,  to  be  found  in 
that  immense  list ;  perhaps  the  order  could  be  found  in  the 
rejected  Epistle  of  Paul  to  the  Laodiceans,  which  he  commanded 
the  Colossians  to  read,  (4  c.  i6v).  Being  thus  provided  with  the 
material  necessary  to  make  "a  new  departure,"  independently  of 
church  or  pope,  it  remains  for  us  to  retrace  our  steps,  and  return- 
ing by  the  same  route,  we  will  halt  by  the  way,  and  resting  our- 


68  THE    KEY  TO  TRUE   CHRISTIANITY. 

selves  for  a  while,  lay  down  our  material  for  a  new  bible,  stop  on 
the  fifteenth  step  of  the  stairs  and  prospect  awhile. 

It  is  a  week  or  two  before  the  discovery  of  the  art  of  printing. 
Surely  we  can  now,  without  difficulty,  furnish  ourselves  with  the 
Word  of  God,  and  boldly  proclaim  our  faith  in  the  bible  as  the 
religion  of  protestants ;  but,  alas  !  there  is  reason  to  fear  a  diffi- 
culty here,  too.  In  England  we  will  be  accommodated,  if  it  be 
possible.  You  ask  for  a  book-store  ;  they  tell  you  they  know 
of  no  such  establishment.  You  say  you  want  to  furnish  your- 
self with  a  bible  ;  they  tell  you  that  a  bible  would  cost  a  king's 
ransom.  How  is  that  ?  They  inform  you  that  those  vi^ho  tran- 
scribed the  bible  did  so  on  parchment ;  that  the  early  manuscripts 
of  the  scriptures  were  all  written  in  uncial  or  capital  letters,  each 
separated  from  the  other,  and  somewhat  similar  to  what  we  see 
now  on  a  sign-board  ;  that  in  order,  therefore,  to  form  a  just  esti- 
mate of  the  value  of  a  bible,  the  parchment,  the  quality  thereof, 
and  the  skill  of  the  writer  must  be  considered  ;  that  you  will 
have,  in  a  word,  to  purchase  the  fruits  of  nearly  a  lifetime  of  an 
amanuensis  whose  services  are,  on  account  of  his  skill  and  learn- 
ing, perhaps  placed  at  a  higher  rate  than  those  of  any  other  man, 
and  hence  you  must  calculate  the  enormous  cost.  Your  funds 
will  not  authorize  such  a  luxury  as  this,  and  you,  good  bible  man, 
must  do  without  your  greatest  treasure.  This  is  enough  to  enrage 
a  saint.  Where  can  you  get  a  bible,  if  only  to  get  a  look  at  one? 
Go  to  yonder  monastery  and  perhaps  they  will  accommodate  you 
with  a  look  at  the  curiosity.  But  will  they  sell  me  one  ?  Yes, 
perhaps,  if  you  can  afford  to  purchase  it.  There  are  monks  in 
every  monastery  whose  lives  are  constantly  occupied  in  transcrib- 
ing the  Word  of  God.  You  ask  the  superioj-,  are  not  the  people 
supplied  with  the  Word  of  God  ?  He  replies,  yes,  through  the 
teachings  of  their  legitimate  pastors,  precisely  as  Jesus  Christ 
taught,  as  he  sent  the  apostles  to  teach,  as  the  martyr-christians 
were  taught,  in  accordance  with  the  arrangement  established  by 
the  Redeemer  Himself.  "  Faith,"  as  the  apostle  says,  "  comes 
by  hearing,"  and  no  change  whatsoever  has  taken  place  in  this 
plan  of  Jesus  Christ  for  nearly  fifteen  centuries.  But  has  it  not 
entered  into  the  plans  of  Jesus  Christ  that  every  christian  could 
have  his  own  bible  ?  //  is  physically  impossible  that  it  could  he  so^ 
for  not  all  the  transcribers  on  earth  could  furnish  a  bible  to  onu 


THE    KEY  TO    TRUE    CHRISTIANITY  gg 

christian  in  every  half  milHon ;  but  then  there  is  another  impos- 
sibility, viz. :  that  not  one  in  a  half  million  could  afford  to  buy 
one.  Some  powerful  and  wealthy  nobleman  may  have  the  means 
to  permit  himself  to  indulge  in  such  a  luxury,  but  only  such,  and 
how  few  are  these  ?  You  are  paralyzed  by  this  shock.  What  ? 
has  God  betrayed  the  interests  of  Christianity  so  that  scarcely  one 
man  in  500,000  could  possess  His  Word  in  this  fifteenth  century? 
It  was  bad  enough  when  we  tarried  in  Rome  in  the  days  of  Con- 
stantine,  when  there  was  not  in  existence  on  this  earth  a  bible, 
for  there  was  no  opportunity  to  collect  the  fragments  of  the 
written  Word,  although  it  must  be  confessed  that  the  best  chris- 
tians that  ever  lived  did  without  its  aid,  but  now,  at  the  interval 
of  1200  years,  that  it  is  practically  impossible  for  one  man  in  a 
half  million  to  have  the  Word  of  God,  "  is  a  hard  saying,  and 
who  can  hear  it  ?'*  Nearly  1500  years  from  the  dawn  of  Chris- 
tianity, and  not  one  man  in  500,000  to  have  it  in  his  power  to 
supply  himself  with  a  copy  of  God's  Word  !  What  has  God 
been  thinking  of?  Hold  !  my  erring  friends  ;  don't  blaspheme  ! 
God's  ways  are  certainly  not  your  ways.  Ask  these  good  people 
has  God  abandoned  his  interest  in  Christianity  ?  Have  all  chris- 
tians ceased  to  exist  ?  No,  is  the  reply  ;  the  world  is  full  of 
them  to-day  (15th  century).  The  same  answer  was  given  by 
Tertullian  in  his  Apologia;  notwithstanding  the  terrible  persecu- 
tions, the  court,  the  camp,  every  rank  of  life  has  its  quota  of 
christians  full  of  faith,  and  all  this  without  having  had  the  luxury 
of  a  bible.  The  great  Columbus,  whose  genius  gave,  in  this 
very  age,  a  continent  to  the  world,  was  as  good  a  christian  as 
you  or  I,  and  probably  he  never  read  a  word  from  a  bible. 

There  is  here  an  antagonism  of  the  most  decided  and  formida- 
ble character  between  God's  arrangements  for  the  propagation  of 
Christianity  and  your  theory.  Jesus  Christ  converted  the  pagan 
world  to  Christianity,  and  preserved  it  so  converted  for  fifteen 
centuries  by  a  plan  adopted  by  Himself,  and  which  is  in  direct 
opposition  to  your  speculations.  Had  He  adopted  your  plan  He 
would  have  inspired  some  man  created  a  century  before  His 
coming  on  earth  in  the  flesh,  with  the  idea  of  printing,  so  that 
when  He  did  come.  His  Word,  which  He  would  have  written 
Himself,  or  ordered  to  have  written  (neither  of  which  he  did), 
would  be  forthwith  transmitted  to  mankind,  or  he  would  have 


70  THE   KEY  TO   TPtUE   CHRISTIANITY. 

deferred  his  coming  to  the  sixteenth  century  of  our  era,  so  that 
the  art  of  printing  might  become  the  great  lever  for  christianizing 
mankind. 

Now^  He  has  done  neither  of  these.  He  has  made  his  own 
arrangements,  which  differ  ^^  toto  ccelo'*  from  yours,  and  unless 
you  can  show  that  since  the  discovery  of  the  art  of  printing,  He 
has  altered  the  course  that  he  adopted  and  maintained  for  the 
christianizing  of  the  world,  it  Is  inevitably  conclusive  that  your 
theory,  to-day,  is  as  much  opposed  to  the  workings  of  the  Re- 
deemer's plans  from  the  beginning,  as  pole  Is  opposed  to  pole. 
Hence  it  is  necessarily  concluded  that,  although  "  the  bible  be 
the  religion  of  protestants,"  from  the  above  array  of  terrible*facts, 
covering  a  period  of  eighteen  and  a  half  centuries,  it  is  not  the 
religion  of  Jesus  Christy  for  He  has  utterly  ignored  it  from  the  begin- 
ning. Moreover,  point  me  out  the  nation  that  has  ever  been 
evangelized  on  the  bible  theory,  although  untold  millions  have 
been  expended  in  developing  the  fruitless  project.  "  By  their 
fruits  you  shall  know  them."  Can  any  theory,  therefore,  be 
more  fallacious  than  this  ?  One  that  is  in  direct  opposition  to 
the  Divine  arrangements  for  the  propagation  of  the  gospel.  In  the 
beginning,  development  and  permanence  of  the  tradition  of  the 
gospel  of  Jesus  Christ  to  the  world. 

Having  returned  from  our  tour,  let  me  ask,  reverend  sir,  what 
course  you  propose  ?  A  new  departure  is  absolutely  necessary  ; 
either  the  one  organized  by  Jesus  Christ  Himself,  and  which,  in 
virtue  of  His  promises.  He  has  guided  and  superintended  from 
the  day  He  sent  His  apostles  with  the  commission  to  teach  all 
nations,  or  the  cutting  out  of  a  new  track  j  the  old  one,  viz.,  the 
present  bible,  being  the  exclusive  property  of  the  Catholic  Church 
(as  I  proved  in  my  last),  and  which,  as  honorable  men,  you  ought 
not  retain  without  her  sanction.  Besides,  you  know,  It  re- 
mains in  your  hands  a  mere  human  production,  every  attempt  to 
prove  it  divinely  inspired  having  failed  thus  far.  You  brought 
with  you  from  the  visit  we  made,  in  addition  to  the  astounding 
facts  so  contradictory  and  destructive  of  our  cherished  hobby  that 
God  gave  the  bible,  cut  and  dry,  to  man,  to  evangelize  the  world, 
you  brought,  I  say,  with  you,  the  material  from  which  you  are 
at  liberty  to  frame  a  bible  of  your  own.  Be  independent  of  Rome 
in  fact;  persevere  in  your  new-fangled  theory  of  evangelizing  the 


THE    KEY  TO    TKUE   CHRISTIANITY. 


71 


world,  in  opposition  to  the  settled  and  permanent  plan  of  Jesus  Christ 
for  now  nearly  eighteen  and  a  half  centuries.  Commence,  then,  at 
once,  start  for  yourselves,  independent  of  church,  pope,  or  God 
Himself.  His  mode  of  doing  things  did  not  suit  you.  When 
the  glorious  reformation  took  root  on  the  earth,  the  Redeemer 
should  have  availed  Himself  of  its  power,  combined  with  the 
great  lever  of  printing,  and  indicated  His  desire  to  keep  pace  with 
the  march  of  progress.  How  terrible  are  such  ideas  as  these,  but 
yet  (pardon  them,  O  Lord  !  they  know  not  what  they  do)  are 
they  not  the  immediate  effects  of  the  terrible  treachery  and  rebel- 
lion against  God's  plans  of  eighteen  and  a  half  centuries'  standing 
for  the  salvation  of  mankind  \ 

Go  to  work,  then,  in  your  independent  course!  You  have 
with  you  the  material.  Select  all  genuine  and  authentic  works  from 
the  spurious,  and  after  you  have  done  all  this,  be  prepared  to 
bring  forth  these  reserved  proofs  for  inspiration,  which  you  say 
you  possess,  and  after  you  have  proved  the  inspiration  of  your 
new  canon,  start  your  new  gospel  in  opposition  to  the  plan 
adopted  by  Jesus  Christ,  which  course  your  ancestors,  300  years 
ago,  should  have  pursued^  collating,  as  I  have  suggested  you  to  do, 
all  the  available  writings  of  the  apostolic  age,  when  they  threw 
off  their  allegiance  to  the  supreme  pontiff;  or  foreseeing,  by 
God's  grace,  the  Insuperable  obstacles  to  your  success  (seeing 
that  you  were  not  able  to  prove  one  word  of  the  biblical  writings, 
with  which  you  are  familiar,  to  be  inspired),  acknowledge  the 
sole  teacher  of  Christianity,  created  by  the  Redeemer  Himself  to 
evangelize  the  world^  which  mission  she  has  been  occupied  with 
for  eighteen  and  a  half  centuries,  and  then  you  will  hearken  to 
her  voice  declaring,  as  the  only  supernatural  witness  available, 
that  the  apostolic  writings  are  inspired  by  the  spirit  of  God.  Thus 
only  can  you  know  the  fact. 

I  cannot  close  this  letter  without  adverting  to  a  sentence  or 
two  in  yours  of  this  morning.  You  say  that  "the  discussion  of 
the  catholic  rule  was  entirely  legitimate."  I  reply  that  there  is 
no  discussion  of  any  interpretation  legitimate  until  you  prove  that 
you  have  scripture  to  Interpret.  Again  you  say,  "  I  granted  my 
opponent  the  right  to  select  the  first  question,  but  not  the  right 
to  direct  how."     I  answer  that  not  only  did  you  grant  me  the 


IJ2  THE  KEY  TO  TRUE  CHRISTIANITY. 

selection  of  the  subject,  but  yo\x  formally  accepted  my  division  of 
it  into  three  parts,  and  you  took  up  my  divisions  of  the  subject 
successively,  and  in  the  order  laid  down  by  me,  and  as  I  was 
aware,  at  first,  of  the  absurdity  of  cooking  my  hare  before  I 
caught  him,  I  advisedly  placed  the  question  of  inspiration  yzrj/,  to 
be  followed  naturally  by  the  quantity  of  inspired  writings,  or  the 
canon,  and  finally  the  right  to  interpret  by  private  judgment,  the 
whole  body  of  inspiration.  In  three  letters  you  took  up  this 
division,  but  your  failure  to  catch  your  hare,  involves  the  impos- 
sibility of  cooking  him.  I  cannot,  therefore,  interpret  the  above 
language  in  any  other  way  than  as  a  reckless  and  desperate  effort 
to  escape  the  toils  in  which  you  are  inextricably  entangled. 

The  public  and  myself,  reverend  sir,  are  looking  for  a  masterly 
article  in  your  next  appearance  in  the  Virginian^  on  the  inspira- 
tion of  the  scriptures — the  only  subject  legitimately  under  discus- 
sion— without  digressions  or  the  introduction  of  irrelevant  matter. 
Give  the  poor  old  church  a  rest  for  once,  and  bestow  your  atten- 
tion exclusively  on  your  own  legitimate  business.  Should  she 
happen  to  be  wrong,  will  that  make  you  right  ?  Cuttle-fish  tac- 
tics will  avail  you  no  further.  The  proofs  for  inspiration  are 
earnestly  and  patiently  looked  for.  By  their  introduction  alone 
can  you  redeem  your  word^  pledged  for  the  proofs,  and  defend 
your  course  from  the  impending  verdict  about  being  pronounced 
by  a  patient  public,  viz.,  that  your  system  of  religion  has  not  a 
shred  of  divine  or  human  testimony  to  uphold  it. 

Respectfully, 

M.  O^KEEFE. 


BROAD  RUN,  FAUQUIER  CO.,  VA.,  SEPT.  nth,  1873. 
REV.  MATTHEW  O'KEEFE. 


Dear  Sir  :  In  contrast  stands  the  protestant  theory.  We 
hold,  too,^  that  the  witness  which  testifies  to  inspiration  must  be 
in  a  supernatural  state  ;  but  we  can  point  to  that  witness  and 
prove  it  to  be  in  an  inspired  or  supernatural  state,  and  we  can 
show  that  that  witness   has   the  power  to  convince  the  church 


THE   KEY   TO   TRUE   CHRISTIANITY.  ^3 

that  God  sent  it  to  testify  of  His  truth.  All  know  that  the  apos- 
tles were  inspired  men.  Many  others,  called  prophets,  in  the 
first  century,  were  inspired,  and  spake  under  the  influence  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  as  the  four  daughters  of  Philip  and  Agabus  (Acts 
21  c.  9— lov).  Paul,  speaking  of  the  church  officers,  says,  "First 
apostles,  second  prophets,"  &c.  The  seven  deacons  were  men 
"full  of  the  Holy  Ghost."  The  seventy  sent  out  by  Christ  had 
powers  through  the  Spirit  to  perform  all  manner  of  miracles.  Of 
the  church  at  Jerusalem  it  is  said  :  "  They  were  all  filled  with 
the  Holy  Ghost  and  began  to  speak  with  other  tongues."  Of 
the  church  at  Antioch  it  is  declared  the  disciples  were  filled  with 
joy  and  with  the  Holy  Ghost.  The  gift  of  tongues,  and  of  pro- 
phecy, and  of  miracles,  and  of  discerning  of  spirits  were  found  in 
all  the  churches,  and  abounded  especially  in  Corinth.  A  prophet 
is  one  who  speaks  as  the  mouth-piece  of  God  ;  not  he  alone  who 
predicts  the  future,  but  he  who  speaks  from  God  His  word. 
Thus  with  the  prophet  at  the  heathen  temples  ;  he  spake  the 
oracles  of  his  deity.  Scripture  prophets  are  those  who  receive 
their  teaching  directly  from  God,  and  speak  it  at  God's  command. 
It  may  be  good  news,  a  command,  or  promise,  or  threat,  or  a 
prediction.  Now  there  were  many  of  these  in  the  new  testa- 
ment church,  and  Jesus  says  that  the  least  of  them  was  greater 
than  John  the  Baptist,  while  none  of  the  old  testament  prophets 
were  greater  than  John.  Luke  7  c.  28v.  The  learned  Michaelis 
thus  renders  this  passage.  The  apostles  rank  first  of  all  the  offi- 
cers of  the  church.  They  were  inspired.  Christ  promised  them 
that  the  Holy  Ghost  should  "  lead  them  into  all  the  truth,"  that 
He  would  bring  to  their  remembrance  all  things  which  he  had 
spoken  unto  them,  &c.  Peter  and  Paul  both  declared  that  the 
old  testament  scriptures  were  given  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  divinely 
inspired,  and  yet  Peter  ranked  the  letters  of  Paul  with  those  scrip- 
tures, saying,  "As  our  beloved  brother  Paul  hath  written  unto 
you,  as  also  in  all  his  epistles,  &c.,  which  the  unlearned  and  un- 
stable wrest,  as  also  the  other  scriptures,  to  their  own  perdition." 
Here  he  tells  us  that  to  pervert  these  letters  leads  to  perdition,  and 
by  the  use  of  the  phrase  ^^  other  scriptures^'  declares  these  letters 
of  Paul  to  be  a  part  of  scripture.  Peter  could  discern  spirits  and 
saw  that  Ananias  lied,  and  that  the  cripple  had  faith  to  be  healed. 
Pai:l  declared  that  he  was  not  a  whit  behind  the  chiefest  of  the 


74 


THE    KEY  TO    THUE    CHRISTIANITY. 


apostles,  and  that  he  received  his  gospel  not  from  man,  but  from 
the  Lord,  that  he  received  from  the  Lord  the  account  of  the 
eucharist,  which  he  vi^rote  to  the  Corinthians.  These  apostles 
of  our  Lord,  having  the  power  to  kill  and  to  make  alive,  to  whom 
it  was  promised  that  in  emergencies  they  need  not  premeditate, 
that  the  Holy  Ghost  would  give  them  what  they  should  say ; 
"for  it  is  not  you,  but  the  Holy  Ghost  which  speaketh  in  you." 
These  manifestly  inspired  men,  in  that  age  of  inspiration,  wrote 
the  new  testament.  The  only  exceptions  are  Luke  and  Mark ; 
and  Luke  was  Paul's  chosen  companion,  and  Mark  was  the  asso- 
ciate of  St.  Peter,  i  Peter  5  c.  13V.  When  prophets  abounded 
in  the  church,  and  multitudes  possessed  the  power  of  miracles 
and  very  many  of  the  disciples  were  filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost^ 
we  have  no  difficulty  in  understanding  what  kind  of  men  Peter 
and  Paul  would  select  to  be  with  them  in  their  work,  and  to  write 
for  the  edification  of  all  ages.  They  were  men  filled  with  the 
Holy  Ghost,  and  Paul  and  Peter,  inspired  men,  were  able  to 
know  whether  the  Holy  Ghost  inspired  the  writings  of  their  com- 
rades. Then  among  the  "prophets  and  teachers"  in  the  church 
at  Antioch,  to  whom  the  Holy  Ghost  said,  "Separate  me  Barna- 
bas and  Saul,"  &c.  Acts  13  c.  i-2v.  Among  these  was  Lucius 
of  Cyrene,  supposed  to  be  the  same  called  Luke,  the  physician 
who  wrote  the  gospel  and  the  acts.  In  the  preface  to  his  gos- 
pel, Luke  says :  "  Having  had  perfect  understanding  of  all 
things  from  above."  Not  "ap  archas"  (from  the  beginning), 
but  "anothen"  (from  above).  As  James  uses  it,  "Every  good 
gift  Cometh  from  above,"  and  John  19  c.  iiv  :  "Except  it  were 
given  xhQtfrom  above^  "anothen."  Besides,  Peter  and  Paul  had 
the  power  of  imparting  the  miraculous  gifts  of  the  Holy  Ghost 
by  the  laying  on  of  hands.  Paul  said  he  had  upon  him  "  the 
care  of  all  the  churches,"  and  uses  language  which  shows  that 
he  claimed  full  power  to  order  and  arrange  the  worship  and  decide 
questions  of  morals ;  as  when  in  Cor.  7  c.  1 7  V.,  he  says,  "And 
so  ordain  I  in  all  churches."  Now  can  any  man  believe  that 
these  apostles  and  St.  John,  with  such  responsibilities  and  such 
full  powers  and  such  wisdom,  and  living  after  the  writings  of 
Luke  and  Mark  were  received  in  the  church,  would  have  allowed 
them  to  be  received  as  of  God,  if  they  had  not  been  given  by  the 
Holy    Ghost  ?     None    but    an    inveterate    caviller.     Paul    says 


THE    KEY  TO    TRVE    OHRISTIANITY.  r  X 

i  O 

(2  Cor.  2  c.  i6v),  "But  we  have  the  mind  of  Christ,"  and  (r 
Thes.  2  c.  13V),  "  When  ye  received  the  Word  of  God,  which 
ye  heard  from  us,  ye. received  it  not  as  the  word  of  men,  but  as 
it  is  in  the  truth^  the  tvord  of  God.''  Again  (i  Thes.  4  c.  8v.), 
"  He  therefore  that  despiseth,  despiseth  not  man,  but  God,  who 
hath  also  given  unto  us  his  "  Holy  Spirit,"  and  in  i  Cor.  14  c. 
37V.  he  asserts  that  the  prophet  or  the  spiritual  man  must  "ac- 
knowledge that  the  things  that  I  write  unto  you  are  the  com- 
mandments of  the  Lord."  Now  we  have  men,  to  whom  Christ 
promised  a  full  inspiration,  men  whom  all  admit  to  be  inspired, 
who  wrote  almost  all^  and  who  superintended  all  the  waiting  of 
the  new  testament  scriptures.  These  men  were  inspired  or  in  a 
supernatural  state,  and  therefore  prepared  to  testify  to  this  inspira- 
tion, this  supernatural  fact ;  they  were  at  hand,  and  not  eighteen 
hundred  years  away,  as  your  present  church,  and  therefore  com- 
petent to  testify  to  a  fact  that  happened  to  themselves,  and  finally 
they  had  the  power  to  convince  the  world  that  God  spoke  through 

them. 

BespectfuUy, 

J.  D.  BLACKWELL. 


NORFOLK,  SEPT.  24th,  1873. 
REV.  J.  D.  BLACKWELL,  D.  D. 

I  who  was  once  as  great  as  Caesar, 

Am  now  reduced  to  Nebuchadnezzar ; 

And  from  as  famed  a  conqueror 

As  ever  took  degree  in  war, 

Or  did  his  exercise  in  battle, 

By  you  turned  out  to  grass  with  cattle. 

— HUDIBRAS. 

Dear  Sir  :  Yours  has  just  come  to  hand.  I  was  beginning 
to  fear  that  you  were  about  to  let  the  case  go  by  default,  and 
hoard  up  for  students  and  skeptics  the  reserved  texts  that  were  so 
long  coming :  but  I  rejoice  to  find  it  otherwise.  I  regret,  how- 
ever, to  find  you  in  such  bad  humor.  One  would  naturally  sur- 
mise that  bracing  air  and  other  genial  surroundings  would  be 
calculated  to  impart  anything  else  than  the  spirit  of  bitterness 


76 


THE   KEY  TO   TRUE   CHRISTIANITY. 


that  pervades  the  whole  communication ;  but  the  fates  often  play 
us  tricks,  notwithstanding  our  best  efforts  to  the  contrary.  How 
applicable,  in  this  case  is  the  old  adage:  "Man  proposes,  but 
God  disposes  !"  But  to  be  serious.  The  long  expected  proofs 
for  the  inspiration  of  the  scripture  have  come  at  last !  There  is 
nothing  like  perseverance,  reverend  sir,  and  the  world  has  to 
thank  me  for  the  formidable  (?)  document  that  would  ever  be, 
otherwise,  buried  in  the  recesses  of  the  brain  of  students  or  skep- 
tics, and  you  have  to  thank  my  indefatigable  efforts  for  saving 
your  reputation  for  truth.  All  the  other  (3)  proofs  offered,  long 
since  being  found  utterly  worthless,  we  are  now  indulged  with 
the  students'  and  skeptics'  reserves,  to  which  I  now  beg  leave  to 
pay  my  respects. 

After  prefacing  somewhat,  you  attempt  to  sustain  Luke  as  an 
inspired  writer ;  (you  remember  one  former  failure  in  reference 
to  the  same  writer,  viz. :  on  the  ground  of  miracles),  for  this  pur- 
pose you  adduce  Luke  himself  as  saying:  "having  had  perfect 
understanding,  he. ^  from  ahove.^^  Now,  reverend  sir,  let  me  pre- 
sent you  with  your  own  text  (verses  2  and  3)  "even  as  they  deli- 
vered them  to  us,  which  (who)  were  eye  witnesses  and 
ministers  of  the  Word;  it  seems  good  to  me  also,  having  had 
perfect  understanding  of  all  things  from  the  very  first^  to  write." 
&c.  You  attempt,  in  contradiction  of  your  own  text^  to  find  in  the 
Greek  word  "anothen"  what  would,  if  true,  suit  your  purpose 
admirably,  but  unfortunately  your  own  text  contradicts  you,  the 
Lexicon  bears  out  your  own  text,  and  St.  Luke  himself  says,  in 
express  words^  that  he  got  his  information,  directly^  from  those 
who  were  eye-witnesses  from  the  beginning,  and  not  from  on  high. 
What  a  cause,  that  would  seek  to  sustain  itself  by  so  glaring  a 
contradiction  !  Luke  was  informed  by  eye-witnesses  and  not 
from  on  high  ;  he  says  so  himself,  and  therefore  his  testimony, 
that  what  he  writes  is  of  human  and  not  of  divine  origin,  settles 
the  question  so  far  as'  you  are  concerned.  Again,  you  say,  it  is 
supposed,  that  Lucius,  of  Cyrene,  was  Luke,  the  EvangeHst. 
Well,  if  Luke,  the  Evangelist,  declares  that  he  wrote  from  infor- 
mation derived  from  eye-witnesses,  it  matters  not  who  Lucius, 
of  Cyrene,  was.  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  find,  amongst  the 
writings  of  Peter  and  Paul,  whom  you  look  to,  to  sustain  the  in- 
spiration of  Luke  and  Mark,  a  correction  or  rather  a  contradic- 


THE    KEY    TO    TRUE   CHRISTIANITY.  nj 

tion  of  this  assertion  of  Luke  who  so  emphatically  declares  that 
he  got  his  information  from  a  human  source  ?  This  unfortunate 
allusion  to  Mark  and  Luke  only  serves  to  make  "  confusion 
worse  confounded." 

Not  only  did  they  not  perform  miracles  to  prove  their  inspira- 
tion, but  one  of  them  declares :  "  He  told  the  tale  as  it  was  told 
him,  by  eye-witnesses,  without  any  other  aid,  and  Luke  is  a  truth- 
ful witness.  This  is  even  a  more  disastrous  attempt  than  the 
one  to  prove  his  Gospel  by  his  miracles,  which  were  no  where. 
Again,  you  quote  from  St.  Paul  to  the  Thessalonians  (4  c.  8  v.) 
"  When  we  received  the  word  of  God,  which  ye  heard  from  us^ 
ye  received  it,  &c."  How  can  this'  text  avail  you  ?  Why  in- 
troduce it?  Does  he  not  say  that  they  received  the  Word  of 
God  from  him,  by  word  of  mouth  and  not  by  writing  ?  Need  I 
remind  you  that  the  commission  given  by  Our  Lord  to  his  Apos- 
tles does  not  imply  that  they  were  inspired  to  write  but  to  preach 
the  Gospel,  as  is  evident  from  the  fact  that  whilst  all  fulfilled  their 
mission  by  preaching,  very  few  left  any  writings.  Again,  you  quote, 
I  Corinthians  (14  c.  37  v.)  that  the  prophet  or  spiritual  man, 
"Must  acknowledge  that  the  things  /  write  unto  you,  are  the 
commandments  of  the  Lord."  I  ask,  could  not  the  Apostle 
convey  to  the  Corinthians  the  commandments  of  God  zuithout  being 
inspired  to  do  so  ?  Can  you  prove  that  Jesus  commanded  him  to  write 
these  ?  He  was  in  possession  of  these  commandments  before  he 
wrote,  and  merely  made  use  of  the  medium  of  writing  to  convey 
them  to  the  Corinthians.  Is  inspiration  to  write,  necessary  for  this  ? 
Suppose  you  wrote,  for  a  child  under  your  charge,  the  ten  com- 
mandments, does  it  follow  that  you  are  inspired  in  so  doing?  Alas! 
for  the  cause  that  cannot  furnish  better  argument  than  this  !  Again, 
you  refer  to  the  text  "Separate  me,  Saul  and  Barnabas,"  &c., 
and  as  the  Apostolic  writings  refer  in  almost  unmeasured  terms 
to  the  gifts  of  Barnabas,  as  an  Apostle,  you  will  please  say  why 
his  Epistle  now  extant,  and  which  has  certainly  been  regarded  as 
canonical  by  numbers  of  the  early  Christians,  is  not  received  by 
you,  whereas -you  receive  the  Gospel  of  Luke  who  declares  him- 
self indebted  to  human  eye  witnesses  for  what  he  wrote  ? 

Nor  is  the  quotation  from  St.  Peter's  Epistle  calculated  to  fur- 
nish you  with  the  slightest  consolation.  As  we  are  engaged  in 
an  investigation  wherein  we  must  take  nothing  for  granted,  it 


•J'g  THE  KEY  TO  TRUE  CHRISTIANITY. 

will  be  necessary  to  have  recourse  to  the  Greek  text  In  order  to 
obtain  the  literal  and  critical  translation  and  meaning  of  the 
words.  The  words  of  the  Greek  text  on  which  you  rely  are 
"^j  kaitas  loipas  graphas^'^YiiQTdWy^ "  as  well  as  the  other  writings;" 
and  the  Greek  text  does  not  indicate  that  the  word  '*- graph as^^ 
has  any  emphatic  or  peculiar  meaning,  inasmuch  as  it  begins  with 
a  small  gamma,  and  is  therefore  a  generic  term,  signifying  any 
kind  of  writing. 

Your  translation  of  the  text  is,  therefore,  an  unwarrantable 
one,  similar  to  that  of  the  Greek  word  referred  to  in  the  text  of 
St.  Luke,  gotten  up  to  serve  a  purpose,  is  borrowed  like  every- 
thing else,  from  the  church's  translation,  although  you  profess  to 
take  nothing  from  church  or  pope. 

I  appeal  to  any  Greek  scholar  if  my  translations  of  the  Greek 
text  be  not  literal  and  critically  true  ;  but  I  may  now  be  asked 
what  can  be  the  meaning  of  the  passage  ;  the  answer  is  simple 
and  easy.  St.  Peter  guards  those  to  whom  he  writes  against  the 
abuses  of  the  unlearned  and  depraved,  who  pervert  all  written  in- 
structions from  himself,  Paul,  or  any  other  writer,  apostolic  or 
otherwise,  as  for  example,  the  apostles'  creed,  in  which  you  pro- 
fess to  believe ;  how  many  thousand  times  has  this  platform  of 
Christianity  been  rent  and  torn  to  pieces  by  the  wicked  and  igno- 
rant !  and  yet  you  will  not,  although  it  may  be  one  of  the  writings 
referred  to  in  the  text,  admit  it  as  inspired  ?  By  the  bye,  if  the 
apostles  were  inspired  to  write,  why,  may  I  ask,  is  not  the  apos- 
tles' creed,  their  joint  production,  regarded  as  of  divine  inspira- 
tion rather  than  the  gospels  of  Mark  and  Luke — no  apostles  ? 

Remember,  reverend  sir,  that  we  must  plant  ourselves  on  the 
merits  of  the  text  critically  considered,  without  any  help  from 
tradition,  pope,  council,  church,  or  any  other  source  whatever, 
and  I  defy  the  world  to  extract  from  that  text,  on  your  platform^ 
any  more  than  I  have  taken  from  it.  Behold,  once  more  the 
success  of  your  long-awaited  proofs  !  look  at  them  now,  and  esti- 
mate their  true  value.  There  does  not  remain  the  vestige  of  a 
single  one  to  prove  for  your  inspiration.  And  this  is  the  sum 
total  of  all  your  writing  and  of  my  indefatigable  efforts  to  bring 
you  to  the  proof  for  over  two  months  !  I  notice  an  effort  in  to- 
day's letter  to  deny  the  identity  of  the  catholic  church  of  to-day 


THE   KEY  TO  TRUE   CHRISTIANITY.  17Q 

with  the  church  in  the  beginning  of  Christianity  ;  there  is  nothing 
that  will  not  be  resorted  to,  to  serve  your  purpose.  But  as  I  intend 
to  introduce  the  catholic  church  to-day  as  the  church  instituted 
by  Jesus  Christ  over  eighteen  hundred  years  ago,  I  will  offset  your 
blind  and  silly  nonsense  with  the  authority  of  one,  who,  although 
never  a  friend  of  the  catholic  church,  yet  never  permits  his  pre- 
judices to  interfere  with  facts  that  are  as  clear  as  the  noonday 
sun. 

Lord  Macauley,  in  his  review  of  Ranke's  History  of  the  Popes, 
speaks  thus  of  the  "  Roman  Catholic  Church,"  (he  gives  her 
this  title).  "  No  other  institution  is  left  standing  which  carries 
the  mind  back  to  the  time  when  the  smoke  of  sacrifice  rose  from 
the  Pantheon."  Again.  "  The  proudest  royal  houses  are  but 
of  yesterday  when  compared  with  the  time  of  the  supreme  pon- 
tiffs." "  The  papacy  remains  not  in  decay,  but  full  of  life  and 
vigor."  "  She  was  great  and  respected  before  the  Saxons  had 
set  foot  on  Britain,  before  the  Frank  had  passed  the  Rhine,  when 
Grecian  eloquence  still  flourished  at  Antioch,  when  idols  were 
still  worshipped  in  the  temple  of  Mecca."  "  The  Republic  of 
Venice  came  next  in  antiquity.  But  the  Republic  of  Venice  was 
modern  when  compared  with  the  papacy,"  &c.  And  in  the  face 
of  all  this,  and  the  consent  of  mankind,  we  are  this  morning 
treated  to  a  specimen  of  nonsensical  babbling  that  can  merit  only 
the  contempt  of  any  rational  ma-n. 

I  have  demonstrated,  through  your  agency,  in  this  discussion, 
the  utter  impossibility  of  discovering  an  inch  of  ground  whereon 
the  biblical  system  might  find  for  itself  a  basis  (this  from  the 
acknowledgment  of  your  inability  to  advance  one  step  towards 
proving  the  apostolic  writings  to  be  a  Divine  revelation);  I  have 

also  clearly  shown  in  my  letter  of that  that  which  you 

call  your  canon  is  in  your  hands,  only  a  catalogue  of  apos- 
tolic writings,  the  result  of  the  labors  of  the  men  whose  name 
they  bear,  and  your  failure  to  prove  any  co-operation  on  the 
part  of  the  Holy  Ghost  being  now  confessed)  is  no  more  your 
canon  than  the  coat  you  wear  is  mine;  inasmuch  as  the  particu- 
lar Roman  church,  from  the  very  days  of  the  apostles,  took 
charge  of  these  documents  as  a  precious  deposit,  and  has  Irad 
them  in  her  keeping  for  eighteen  centuries.     She  has,  to  be  sure. 


OA  THE   KEY  TO  TRUE   CHRISTIANITY. 

during  that  period,  freely  and  generously  bestowed  them,  with 
her  teachings,  on  the  nations  which  she  has  converted  to  the 
faith  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  given  them,  by  virtue  of  her  Inerrancy, 
a  character  which  they  could  never  otherwise  possess  (for  the  result 
of  the  present  discussion  abundantly  demonstrates  this);  but  she 
is  unwilling  that  the  nation  that  has  received  the  blessings  of 
Christianity  at  her  hands  should.  In  rejecting  her  authority,  make 
use  of  that  catalogue  which  she  has  taught  that  nation  to  be  the 
JVord  of  God^  and  which,  without  her  authority,  can  never  be 
ascertained  or  proved  ;  hence  the  failure  to  prove  them  inspired 
being  now  admitted,  they  dwindle  down  necessarily  to  the'status 
of  merely  human  records  in  such  hands,  and  self-respect  and 
delicacy  would  prompt  the  immediate  rejection  of  them,  such  as 
they  are,  coming  from  a  source  against  which  you  daily  declare 
a  fierce  and  unrelenting  war;  for  my  part,  were  I  In  your  place, 
I  would  feel  that  all  her  gifts  should  be  returned  forthwith ;  any- 
how, in  any  other  hands  than  hers,  they  are  like  Dead  Sea  fruit, 
beautiful  to  look  upon,  but  they  turn  to  ashes  on  the  lips.  Hav- 
ing in  my  last  demonstrated  that  an  antagonism  of  the  most  direct 
character  exists  between  the  scheme  organized  by  the  Redeemer 
for  the  christianizing  of  the  world  (and  which  like  the  grain  of 
mustard-seed,  has  been  wonderfully  developing  for  the  past 
eighteen  centuries  all  over  the  earth),  and  the  system  represented 
by  you ;  having  also  shown  the  impossibility  of  the  existence  of 
your  system  during  the  first  fifteen  centuries  of  that  period,  it 
now  only  remains  for  me  to  collect  my  proofs  and  present  them 
to  the  world,  which  I  shall  do  as  briefly  as  possible. 

According  to  your  system,  detached  sayings  of  Jesus  Christ 
(and  very  few  at  that),  and  a  message  sent  by  Him,  through  St. 
John,  to  each  of  the  seven  bishops  of  Asia  Minor — but  which, 
being  of  a  personal  character,  is  of  no  practical  utility  to  any  one 
else — constitute  the  sum  total  of  the  christian  revelation.  An 
appropriation  of  the  apostoHc  writings,  the  owner  not  consenting 
thereto,  and  an  abortive  attempt  for  three  centuries,  with  the 
above  material,  to  revolutionize  and  set  aside  the  system  planned 
by  Jesus  Christ  and  maintained  by  Him  for  eighteen  and  a  half 
centuries ;  behold  !  from  what  has  been  demonstrated  through 
the  medium  of  this  discussion,  the  true  status  of  the  biblical  sys- 


THE  KEY  TO  TRUE  CHRISTIANITY. 


81 


tern  !  In  a  word,  what  you  call  your  bible  and  canon  is  in  reality 
but  a  collection  of  records,  letters,  &c.,  written  by  men  who 
lived  in  the  apostolic  age,  which  had  been  collected  and  preserved 
in  the  form  you  now  possess  them,  but  which  have  been  pur- 
loined from  the  unwilling  proprietor,  and  which,  without  any 
authority  from  God,  but  in  direct  opposition  to  His  arrangements 
of  eighteen  and  a  half  centuries'  duration,  you  make  use  of, 
through  the  medium  of  the  wealth  of  this  world,  extracted  from 
the  pockets  of  the  unwary  and  ignorant,  to  thwart  the  arrange- 
ments of  the  Son  of  God  for  the  salvation  of  mankind.  "  He 
that  is  not  with  me  is  against  me,  and  he  that  gathereth  not  with 
me  scattereth/'  This  is  strong  but  truthful  language,  and  the 
issue  of  this  discussion  proves  its  correctness  in  every  particular. 
I  am  not,  reverend  sir,  hazarding  any  suggestion  ;  I  am  merely 
summing  up  legitimate  consequences. 

But  the  honest  inquirer  after  truth  may  with  perfect  propriety, 
now  say  to  me,  "  Take  care  !  It  is  true  that  you  have  succeeded 
fully  in  showing  that  the  bible  cannot  be  proved  to  be  a  Divine 
revelation  on  protestant  principles ;  that,  therefore,  the  question 
of  canon  and  the  right  of  private  interpretation  is  not  to  be  a 
moment  entertained,  since  the  failure  of  the  attempt  to  prove  the 
inspiration  j  but  do  you  not  tread  on  dangerous  ground  ?  Are 
not  numbers  likely,  by  your  arguments,  to  lose  the  faith  (such  as 
it  is)  that  they  have  in  Christianity  ?  Are  you  not  engaged  in  a 
work  that  gives  comfort  to  the  infidel  and  rationalist  ?  I  answer, 
God  forbid  that  I  should,  by  my  writings,  cause  one  soul  to  be 
perverted  from  Christianity  to  infidelity  !  I  have  spent  twenty- 
two  years  in  the  service  of  God — twenty-one  in  this  city^de- 
voting  myself  and  the  poor  abilities,  in  the  measure  given  me,  to 
His  service  exclusively  ;  and  that  I  should,  at  this  period  of  my 
life,  become  the  agent  of  withdrawing  from  God  a  single  soul,  is 
as  abhorrent  to  my  nature  as  it  is  contradictory  of  a  life  spent  in 
His  service. 

But  if  I  see  my  friends  enter  what  I  know  to  be  a  mock- 
auction  establishment ;  when  I  know  they  will  be  invited  to  pay 
honest  money  for  valueless  wares  ;  think  you  that  it  would  be  a 
proof  of  true  friendship  to  allow  them  thus  to  squander  their 
means  on  what  I  was  convinced  was  not  a  genuine  article  ?     The 

application  is  easy  and  clear  to  the  readers  of  the  letters  that  cover 

6 


32  THE  KEY   TO  TRUE  CHRISTIANITY. 

the  pages  of  this  discussion.  Or  assuming  the  role  of  a  Samson 
(si  licet  parva  componere  magnis — if  it  be  allowable  to  compare 
small  things  with  great),  do  I  seek  to  enjoy  the  luxury  of  destroying 
myself  and  friends  in  pulling  down  the  columns  of  the  temple  to 
be  revenged  on  my  enemies  ?  But  I  glory  in  being  the  humble 
instrument  in  God's  hands  of  shedding  light  in  the  Cimmerian 
darkness  that  obscures  a  system  that  never  borrowed  onQ  of 
Heaven's  rays  to  Illuminate  it.  I  rejoice  in  the  occasion  that  is 
offered  me  to  present  to  the  well-disposed  the  opportunity  of 
using  their  reason  and  good  sense  in  seeing  for  themselves  the 
baseless  fabric,  beneath  which  they  have  heretofore  so  confidingly, 
because  ignorantly,  loved  to  dwell.  The  result  of  this  discussion 
should  serve  as  a  warning  to  them  to  find  some  safe  harbor 
wherein  to  seek  shelter  from  the  ruin  and  shipwreck  that  sur- 
rounds them  ;  for  their  ship  has  been  proved  to  be  utterly  unsea- 
worthy.  No,  reverend  sir,  I  am  no  caviller.  I  am  as  the  true 
physician  who  will  save  life,  even  if  the  effort  to  do  so  cause 
the  most  exquisite  pain  to  the  patient. 

I  know  that  to  cast  off  from  the  moorings  of  a  lifetime,  where 
we  have  revelled  in  genial  society,  in  laughing  and  rippling  waters, 
without  a  shadow  of  consciousness  of  danger  heretofore.  Is  a  task 
hard  to  accomplish  and  "  a  saying  hard  to  hear ;"  but  God's 
grace  is  all  sufficient,  if  we  only  obey  the  call.  "  If  to-day  you 
hear  His  voice,  do  not  allow  your  hearts  to  be  hardened  against 
it,"  says  the  royal  prophet.  But  you  ask,  what  would  you  have 
us  do  ?  Abandon  what  of  Christianity  is  reasonably  ours  and  be- 
come rationalists  ?  Surrender  even  the  few  consoling  words  of 
the  Redeemer  to  be  found  in  the  apostolic  records  ?  No  !  Em- 
phatically No !  Christianity  has  flourished  for  over  eighteen 
centuries  under  a  form  that  was  given  it  by  its  Divine  Founder 
at  its  commencement.  It  has  preserved  its  identity  ever  since — 
a  corporate  body  ;  like  the  human  body,  it  has  from  its  birth,  or 
rather  from  the  hands  of  its  creator,  Jesus  Christ,  gone  on  de- 
veloping for  eighteen  centuries  under  an  appellation  bestowed 
upon  it  by  its  Founder,  "  My  Church."  What !  do  you  mean 
the  Roman  Catholic  Church  ?  If  so,  I  shall  never  join  her. 
Then  you  have  no  hope  of  remaining  a  christian.  Your  own 
system  has  been  proved  to  be  an  absolute  failure,  unable  to  stand 
the  test  of  reason  ;  and  there  Is  no  other  system  of  Christianity 


THE  KEY  TO  TRUE    CHRISTIANITY.  gg 

left  but  this.  Do  you  prefer  becoming  rationalist  ?  Perhaps  so. 
In  making  such  a  choice  you  are  only  following  in  the  footsteps 
of  millions  of  your  own  way  of  thinking,  viz.  :  On  biblical 
principles,  men  of  matured  minds  who  detected  the  hollowness 
of  your  system  long  before  you,  but  who,  being  poisoned  from 
their  infancy  by  the  slanders  constantly  uttered  against  the  church, 
never  thought  of  examining  into  the  truth  or  falsehood  of  these 
imputations,  and  therefore  remain  practically  rationalists.  Our 
country  is  to-day  filled  with  such  men.  Were  you,  reverend  sir, 
at  the  foot  of  the  cross,  on  Calvary,  during  the  crucifixion,  would 
you  have  cried  out  with  the  crowd,  "  crucify  Him,  crucify  Him  ;" 
or  would  you  tender  your  sympathies  to  the  afilicted  and  heart- 
broken mother  and  her  friends  ?  Undoubtedly,  I  would  the  lat- 
ter, you  now  say.  Were  you  the  friend  of  Saul,  would  you 
accompany  him  to  Damascus,  breathing  with  him  fire  and  sword 
against  the  followers  of  Christ  ?  You  answer  No  !  unhesitatingly, 
now.  But  you  would  hear  Him  address  Himself  to  Paul,  thus  : 
"Saul !  Saul !  whypersecutest  thou  Me  ? — I  am  Jesus,  whom  thou 
persecutest."  Over  eighteen  centuries  have  rolled  by,  reverend 
sir,  since  these  remarkable  words  were  uttered  by  Christ,  and  He 
could  to-day^  with  equal  reason  and  force,  pronounce  the  same 
words  in  your  ear  as  he  did  in  the  ear  of  Saul  then.  He  declared 
Himself  persecuted  by  Saul  then.^  in  the  person  of  His  children, 
and  with  how  much  better  reason  can  He  declare  Himself  perse- 
cuted to-day  in  the  person  of  His  spouse,  for  whom,  the  same  St. 
Paul  says :  "  He  died  that  He  might  preserve  her  holy  and  un- 
spotted." ^^  Mutato  nomine  fabula  de  te  narratur^^  says  the  poet: 
*' Change  the  name  and  the  case  is  your  own." 

Your  own  system  of  Christianity  being  proved  groundless,  there 
is  no  other  resource  now  left  you  than  to  look  conscientiously  at 
your  position.  Can  it  be  possible  that  the  words  of  Jesus  Christ, 
addressed  to  Paul,  are  applicable  to  you  ?  There  is,  to-day,  no 
Christianity  left  you  but  what  the  catholic  church  represents,  and 
therefore  if  you  are  not  prepared  to  abandon  Christianity  in  toto, 
you  had  better  see  if  you  are  not  impersonating  Paul  in  his  cru- 
sade against  Christ's  spouse,  in  the  nineteenth  century.  But  you 
say,  how  can  I  do  otherwise  than  persecute  her  ?  Saul  said  the 
same,  and  was  in  as  good  faith  as  you  are ;  hut  was  he  not  wrong 


34  THE    KEY   TO  TRUE    CHRISTIANITY. 

in  SO  doing?  Did  he  not  think  he  was  doing  a  service  to  God 
whilst  persecuting  her  ?  And  were  I  in  your  place,  believing  as 
you  do  (that  is,  presuming  on  your  good  faith),  I  should  far  ex- 
ceed you  in  viHfication  of  her ;  but,  like  Saul,  I  thank  God  who 
has,  by  the  gift  of  faith,  opened  my  eyes  and  given  me  to  behold 
nothing  but  loveliness  in  the  spouse  of  Jesus  Christ.  "  Thou 
art  beautiful,  my  beloved  one,  and  there  is  no  stain  in  Thee," 
says  the  spouse  in  the  Canticles. 

I  shall  now  proceed  to  develop  the  foundation  of  the  only  form 
of  Christianity  that  will  bear  the  test  of  close  scrutiny  ;  the  bibli- 
cal system  having  proved  itself  a  perfect  failure,  as  was  already 
demonstrated.  Let  us  see  whether  the  Catholic  system  will 
stand  the  test  of  criticism  ;  and  in  instituting  this  test,  I  wish  it 
to  be  distinctly  understood  that  I  ask  for  no  more  than  what  I 
cheerfully  accorded  you,  viz. :  The  apostolic  records  as  human 
testimonies  of  the  facts  related  in  them.  With  the  aid  of  these 
human  testimonies  I  shall  develop  a  system,  an  organization, 
perfect  in  itself;  the  exclusive  work  of  Him  whom  vou  and  1 
recognize  to  be  the  Maker  of  all  things.  We  agree  in  saying 
with  the  crowd  who  beheld  His  miracles,  "  He  hath  done  all 
things  well,"  &c.,  and  when,  in  the  creation.  He  made  all  things, 
He  pronounced  the  Divine  approbation  on  His  own  work.  The 
latter  cost  Him  merely  His  "fiat."  The  former,  the  work  of 
the  Redeemer,  cost  Him  His  life.  "  Christ  died  for  His  church," 
says  St.  Paul.  How  much  more  important,  therefore,  this  last 
work  of  His  !  The  machinery,  and  the  creations  regulated  by 
that  machinery — all  the  work  of  this  Divine  Architect — once  set 
in  motion  by  Him,  have  been  operating  with  precision  and  per- 
fection now  nearly  six  thousand  years  ;  and  man  has  only  to  look 
on  with  admiration  and  awe  during  his  passage  on  this  earth,  at 
these  wonderful  works  of  God.  But  come  and  behold  the  last 
of  His  works  here  !  Four  thousand  years  after  the  creation.  He 
visited  this  earth  in  human  flesh,  to  remove  the  penalties  which 
the  abuse  of  the  free  will  of  man  entailed  upon  himself,  and  to 
restore  to  him  his  lost  inheritance.  The  records  left  by  His 
chosen  companions  inform  us,  that,  in  addition  to  having  paid 
the  ransom  for  man  to  the  Divine  Justice,  He  laid  the  founda- 
tion of  a  society  to  exist  on  the  earth  to  the  end  of  time,  organ- 
ized by  Himself,  and  under  a  title  which  He  Himself  gave  to  it. 


THE   KEY    TO   TRUE   CHRISTIANITY.  g^ 

And  mark  the  contrast  here  !  Whilst  we  utterly  fail  to  find  one 
word  in  the  same  records  that  would  lead  us  to  conclude  their 
Divine  origin,  we,  on  the  other  hand,  learn  from  them  that  the 
Creator,  four  thousand  years  after  the  period  of  the  general  crea- 
tion, is  Himself  directly  about  to  lay  on  this  earth,  the  foundation 
of  an  Institution  which  is  to  last  to  the  end  of  time. 

Naturally  we  expect  a  grand  work,  and  It  would  be  blasphemy 
to  prophesy  failure.  Open  the  pages  of  the  historian  Matthew, 
and  read  i6  c.  15  v.  "Thou  art  Peter,  and  upon  this  rock  I 
will  build  my  church,  and  the  gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail 
against  it."  We  are  now  over  eighteen  centuries  removed  from 
this  promise,  and  must  necessarily  find  It  realized,  because  it  is 
the  promise  of  Him  who  Is  "the  Way,  t-he  truth  and  the  Life." 
It  is  as  Impossible  to  close  our  eyes  against  the  realization  of  the 
promise,  as  to  close  them  against  the  fact  of  creation  ;  and  the 
same  historian  (18  c.  17V.)  records  of  Christ,  "And  If  he  will 
not  hear  the  church,  let  him  be  to  thee  as  the  heathen  and  pub- 
lican." These  words  Indicate  His  church  as  Hh^  as  clearly  as 
were  He  to  refer  to  His  sun.  His  moon,  His  earth,  &c.  There- 
fore an  institution  exists  on  this'  earth,  created  eighteen  centuries 
ago  by  the  Great  Creator  of  all  things,  and  perfect  like  all  His 
other  creations  ;  In  fact,  could  we  suppose  degrees  In  perfection, 
this  is  transcendently  above  all  others,  because  It  cost  Him  a  life 
of  thirty-three  years  to  complete  it,  and  then  the  sacrifice  of  His 
life.  "Christ  died  for  His  church,"  says  St.  Paul.  Who  is 
there  that  believes  in  a  God  that  loves  to  contemplate  His  works, 
that  believes  in  the  redemption  of  man  by  God,  and  the  facts 
recorded  by  the  historian  Matthew  of  the  creation,  hy  God  In  the 
flesh,  of  an  Institution  on  this  earth,  that  is  not  anxious  to  behold 
it,  to  admire  its  organization,  and  since  It  does  exist  through  the 
agency  of  the  most  beautiful  of  His  Divine  Attributes — His 
Mercy  to  man — who,  I  ask,  is  not  prepared,  on  beholding  this 
realization,  to  glorify  God  for  this  last  creation  of  His — the  fruit 
of  His  mercy  to  man  ?  Although  it  Is  Impossible  to  prove  that 
Christ  directed  a  bible  to  be  written^  behold  the  fact  of  the  creation 
of  a  teacher  by  God  on  this  earth,  whom  He  commands  all  to  hear  I 
Now  there  is  no  commandment  of  the  decalogue  more  bindlno; 
than  this  command  of  the  same  God  "/^  hear  his  church^''  under 
a  threat  of  the   severest  penalties.      That  a   Divinely-instituted 


gg  THE    KEY   TO    TRUE   CHRISTIANITY. 

teacher  has  been  created  by  the  Redeemer — God,  whose  teach- 
ings are  obligatory  on  all  on  this  earth  to  be  received  with  respect, 
is  a  fact  beyond  question,  recorded  by  the  historian  Matthew, 
the  companion  of  God  Himself,  and  whose  testimony  cannot  be 
gainsayed. 

Having  secured  the  existence  of  this  Heavenly  Teacher,  it 
now  behooves  us  to  know  somewhat  of  her  organization — or 
component  parts.  The  same  reliable  historian,  Matthew,  (28  c. 
20  v.),  furnishes  us  with  the  key  to  the  organization  of  this  Divi- 
nely-created Teacher.  He  records  that  Christ,  as  He  was  about 
to  ascend  into  Heaven,  addressing  his  friends,  the  Apostles,  in 
the  following  remarkable  words  :  "  All  power  is  given  me  in 
Heaven  and  on  earth.  Go  ye,  therefore,  teach  all  nations,"  &c. 
Here  we  have  the  embodiment  of  the  component  parts  of  this 
Divinely  organized  Teacher.  The  Apostles  were  ordered  to 
teach — this  order  constituted  them  the  magisterial  portion  of  the 
church — and  all  nations  were  commanded  to  hear  these  teachers 
(for  the  command  to  teach,  given  the  Apostles  implied  necessarily 
the  correlative  obligation  on  the  part  of  "  all  nations  "  to  hear 
these  teachers — besides  Christ's  direct  command  to  "  hear  the 
church  "  places  this  inference  beyond  peradventure)  under  pain 
of  being  ranked  as  outcasts.  The  command  of  Jesus  Christ  to 
the  magisterial  portion  of  His  church  was  peremptory  and  final, 
involving  a  subjection  to  the  Divine  malediction,  did  they  refuse 
to  obey  whilst  the  command  of  Jesus  Christ  to  all  nations  to 
"hear"  His  teachers  was  equally  peremptory  and  He  Himself 
characterized  the  refusal  to  hear,  in  language  cbmminatory  of 
the  severest  chastisements.  "  He  that  will  not  hear  the  church 
let  him  be  to  thee  as  the  heathen  and  publican."  There  are 
therefore,  in  this  organization  created  by  Jesus  Christ,  two  dis- 
tinct elements  running  in  parallel  lines  to  the  end  of  the  world, 
viz.  :  the  teachers  and  the  taught ;  these  constitute  the  church 
which  the  Creator  of  all  things  and  the  Redeemer  of  men  insti- 
tuted, and  left  after  Him  on  earth.  We  have  now  secured 
through  the  writer,  Matthew,  His  church  (the  church  of  the 
Living  God,  as  St.  Paul  calls  it)  constituted  of  the  elements 
already  named.  We  shall  next  proceed  to  inquire  whether  all 
the  teachers  were  placed  by  the  Redeemer — God  on  an  equal 
footing  in  this   His  creation.     We  ask  did  He  constitute  His 


Il  THE  KEY  TO  TEUE  CHRISTIANITY.  gfj 

Church  SO  that  each  teacher  was  independent  of  the  other,  and 
subject  to  no  head  but  Himself?  I  reply,  that  the  same  historian, 
Matthew,  throws  the  fullest  light  on  this  question.  Instead  of 
telling  the  world,  as  an  ambitious  or  interested  man  might  have 
done,  that  he  was  himself  the  special  favorite  of  the  Redeemer, 
he  sets  himself,  and  all  personal  motives  aside,  and  declares  that 
the  Redeemer  selected  one  of  His  apostles,  and  changed  his 
name  from  Simon  to  Cephas,  to  signify  the  virtue  and  power 
with  which  He  was  about  to  endow  him,  designating  him  Cephas 
or  Peter,  which  in  all  the  languages  of  that  day  signified  a  rock. 
We  naturally  ask  why  Christ  changed  the  man's  name  and  gave 
him  so  singular  a  one  ?  The  answer  is  a  simple  one  :  because 
He  had  already  marked  him  out  for  a  peculiar  mission  which  his 
name  would  always  indicate,  and  that  it  was  His  purpose  to  found 
this,  His  creation,  on  him,  at  the  same  time  asserting  that  the 
powers  of  hell  would  be  impotent  against  this  creation  of  His, 
not  by  reason  of  any  native  strength  possessed  by  this  apostle, 
but  by  virtue  of  the  Divine  decrees  for  which  the  word  of  God  is 
pledged. 

I  am  perfectly  well  aware  of  the  desperate  but  ever  abortive 
efforts  made  by  those  who  seek  to  preserve  the  name  of  chris- 
tians, and  yet  set  aside,  by  all  kinds  of  sophistry,  this  arrange- 
ment made  by  God  in  assigning  to  this  apostle  so  prominent  a 
position  in  the  economy  of  His  church,  hence  in  order  to  set 
aside  all  doubts  on  this  matter,  I  refer  you,  reverend  sir,  to  one 
of  these  beautiful  figures  of  the  Redeemer  recorded  by  the  histo- 
rian John,  21  c.  i6v. — Christ  addressing  this  apostle  in  presence 
of  all  the  others,  says,  " '  Simon,  son  of  John,  lovest  thou  me  more 
than  these?'  He  saith  to  Him,  'Yea,  Lord,  thou  knowest  that  I 
love  thee.'  He  saith  to  him,  'Feed  my  lambs.'  He  saith  to 
him  again,  '  Simon,  Son  of  John,  lovest  thou  me  ?'  He  saith  to 
Him,  'Yea,  Lord,  thou  knowest  that  I  love  thee.'  He  saith  to 
him,  'Feed  my  lambs.'  He  saith  to  him  the  third  time,  'Simon, 
son  of  John,  lovest  thou  me?'  He  saith  to  him,  'Feed  my 
sheep.'" 

I  ask,  is  it  possible  to  find  on  earth  a  clearer  indication  of  what 
Jesus  intended  for  Peter,  than  this  ?  He  assimilates  this  church 
of  His  to  a  sheepfold,  the  constituent  parts  whereof  are  a  shep- 
herd, sheep  and  lambs.     Where  are  the  sheep  and  lambs  referred 


gg  THE    KEY  TO  TRUE    CHRISTIANITY.  • 

to  in  the  above  passage  ?  Feed  my  lambs.  Feed  my  sheep. 
They  arc  mine.  His,  emphatically.  And  "  the  good  shepherd 
giveth  his  life  for  his  sheep.*'  "  I  am  the  good  shepherd,  I  know 
my  sheep  and  my  sheep  know  me."  And  what  does  this  good 
shepherd  now  propose  to  do  ?  Nothing  less  than  to  entrust  to 
one  of  His  apostles  the  charge  and  care  of  H'ls  whole  flock.  His 
lambs.  His  sheep.  His  flock  !  And  this  he  has  actually  done 
in  the  command  contained  in  the  above  quotation.  And  to 
whose  care  does  He  entrust  them  ?  To  that  apostle  whom  He 
styled  a  rock,  upon  whom  He  promised  to  build  His  church,  to 
whom  He  gave  exclusively  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven. 
Can  any  prerogative  be  more  suggestive  than  this  ?  He  entrusted 
to  him  the  charge  of  His  whole  flock.  Now,  as  we  have  already 
learned  the  constituent  parts  of  this  creation  of  the  God-man, 
viz. :  the  teachers  and  the  taught,  here  we  have  the  perfection  of 
that  organization  established  by  Christ  on  earth,  viz.  :  His  church 
to  be  presided  over  by  one  of  His  apostles  ;  His  sheepfold  to  be 
under  the  guidance  of  a  shepherd  appointed  by  Himself  to  the 
charge  of  the  sheep  and  lambs,  viz.,  of  His  whole  flock.  Could 
the  meaning  of  the  Redeemer,  when  He  declared  He  was  about 
to  build  His  church  upon  Peter,  be  better  illustrated  than  by  this 
figure  of  his  sheepfold  and  its  newly  and  divinely-appointed  shep- 
herd ?  We  have  advanced  one  step  further,  and  have  now 
arrived  at  the  knowledge  of  the  existence  of  the  perfect  organiza- 
tion completed  by  the  mind  of  Him  who  made  all  things. 

Do  you,  reverend  sir,  find  fault  with  this  arrangement  ?  It  is 
not  mine — it  was  effected  over  eighteen  centuries  ago  by  Him 
"  by  whom  all  things  were  made."  Why  not  turn  your  critical 
eye  towards  the  heavens  ?  You  will,  doubtless,  have  equally 
good  reason  to  find  fault  with  the  works  of  the  great  Creator 
there  ?  Our  own  earth,  too,  should  claim  a  moderate  share 
of  your  sagacious  attention.  There  are  parts  of  her  circum- 
ference wherefrom  the  inhabitants  cannot  catch  a  glance  of 
the  sun  for  months ;  there  are  other  parts  where  his  influence  is 
almost  intolerable  all  the  year  round.  Then  the  seasons  should 
also  claim  a  share  of  your  reformatory  attention.  Let  Him  (the 
Creator)  understand  that  sometimes  the  seasons  are  the  reverse 
of  what  they  should  be  ;  that  when  warmth  is  desirable.  He  sub- 
stitutes cold,  and  when  the  interests  of  agriculture  are  likely  to 


THE    KEY    TO   TRUE   CHRISTIANITY.  gg 

be  subserved  by  humidity,  a  season  of  extreme  drought  is,  by 
His  arrangement,  substituted.  I  have  not  heard  you  utter  any 
complaints  relative  .to  these  grievances,  but  they  vi^ould  be  as 
valid  and  reasonable  against  the  management  of  the  physical 
world,  as  your  abuse  against  this  last  best  work  of  His^  which 
His  infinite  mercy  towards  you  and  all  compelled  Him  to  create, 
is  reasonable.  He  loved  this  work  of  His  so  much  that  "  He 
died  for  it,"  viz. :  His  church,  as  the  apostle  St.  Paul  testifies, 
and  you,  reverend  sir,  and  those  who  think  with  you,  the  expect- 
ant beneficiaries  of  this  creation  of  God,  are  never  happy  unless 
when  you  are  traducing  and  "  speaking  all  manner  of  evil  things" 
against  her^  not  reflecting  that  her  spouse  will  be  her  avenger. 

We  have  now  secured,  with  the  aid  of  truthful  historians,  the 
knowledge  of  the  perfect  organization  of  this  new  creation — a 
visible  body  composed  of  two  elements — the  teachers  and  the 
taught — presided  over,  by  Divine  appointment.^  by  a  visible  head, 
viz.,  Peter,  upon  whom  the  church  rests,  upheld  not  by  his  own 
strength,  but  sustained  by  the  Omnipotent  power  of  God;  for 
mark  the  word  of  God  after  constituting  him  the  rock  of  the 
church  :  "  And  the  gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail  against  it !" 
The  omnipotence  of  God  is  hereby  pledged  for  the  fulfilment  of 
the  end  of  this  creation — a  mission  to  teach  the  world  all  the 
truths  Jesus  Christ  was  commissioned  by  His  Father  to  teach, 
without  any  possibility  of  admixture  of  error,  under  the  guidance 
of  this  visible  head  ;  or  to  revert  to  the  beautiful  figure  of  Jesus 
Christ,  we  have  the  whole  sheepfold  placed  by  Him,  the  great 
Shepherd,  In  charge  of  one  man,  who.  In  visible  form,  will  always 
represent  Himself,  who  Is  no  longer  to  abide  In  visible  form  on 
the  earth.  This,  I  repeat.  Is  the  arrangement  of  God,  not  ours. 
We  are  equally  justified  in  attacking  any  other  creation  of  His 
as  we  are  In  attacking  this. 

Having  proceeded  thus  far,  let  us  now  turn  our  attention  to 
the  consideration  of  the  permanence  of  this  creation.  The  his- 
torian Matthew  will  furnish  us  the  needful  Information  by  record- 
ing the  words  of  the  commission :  Go,  teach  all  nations,  to  the 
end  of  the  world.  Now  there  Is  not  a  nation  that  then  existed, 
or  did  exist  since,  that  exists  now,  or  will  exist  to  the  end  of  the 
world  that  is  not  comprised  In  this  commission. 

They  are  all  to  be  taught,  and  by  this  teaching  body.      But 


9Q  THE    KEY  TO  TRUE    CHRISTIANITY. 

these  individual  men  will  not  hav^e  their  lives  protracted  so  as  to 
continue  teaching  on  earth  to  the  end  of  the  world  ?  Certainly 
not ;  but  the  moral  body  created  by  Jesus  Christ,  and  called  by 
Him  "  My  Church,"  was  created  by  Him  to  last  to  the  end  of* 
the  world  ;  it  is,  like  all  human  bodies,  subject  to  the  laws  of  in- 
crease and  loss,  yet  preserving  its  moral  identity  from  the  hour 
of  its  creation  by  Jesus  Christ  to  the  hour  when — its  mission 
being  fulfilled — it,  like  all  other  creations  of  God,  closes  its  ex- 
istence, and  Jesus  Christ  indicates  in  the  most  unmistakable  hn-^ 
guage  when  it  will  cease  to  work,  viz.  :  when  all  nations  are, 
through  its  agency,  taught,  or  at  the  close  of  the  world.  But  no 
change  in  its  fundamental  parts  can  take  place — the  teachers,  the 
taught  and  the  supreme  pastor — the  original  constitutive  elements 
of  its  formation  by  its  grand  architect  must  ever  abide — remove 
any  one  of  them  and  you  have  a  monstrosity  ;  take  away  the 
teachers,  and  the  gospel  cannot  reach  the  nations  ;  take  away  the 
taught,  and  the  magisterial  office  is  a  farce — none  to  be  taught ; 
take  away  the  shepherd  appointed  by  Christ  over  the  whole  or- 
ganization, and  you  have  an  acephalous  institution — a  lusus  natura 
as  hideous  as  a  human  body  without  the  s^e  corresponding 
necessary  appendage.  They  are  all  three  absolutely  essential  to 
the  existence  of  the  whole,  in  the  nature  of  things.  They  have 
been  chosen  and  combined  together  by  the  design  of  Him  who 
created  all  things,  and  with  as  much  plausibility,  and  with^as  lit- 
tle absurdity,  might  you  seek  to  pluck  the  sun  from  our  solar 
system  as  to  seek  to  rob  this  moral  body,  the  work  of  the  Great 
Creator  also,  of  its  head,  or  any  one  of  its  essential  elements. 
It  must  last,  thus  constituted,  to  the  end  of  the  world  ;  and  they 
who,  after  a  period  of  eighteen  hundred  years  existence  of  this 
grand  creation  in  the  midst  of  men,  will  seek  to  question  her  evi- 
dence (whilst,  anomaly  of  anomalies  !  every  breath  they  draw 
may  be  regarded  as  a  protest  against  her  authority),  are  as  inex- 
cusable as  the  man  who,  whilst  the  noonday's  sun  is  pouring  his 
beams  upon  his  head,  persists  in  denying  the  existence  of  the  sun. 
Where  Peter  is,  there  is  the  church.  The  language  of  St.  Am- 
brose, ringing  through  the  vaults  of  the  centuries,  "  ubi  Petrus, 
ibi  Ecclesia,"  is  no  less  true  to-day  than  was  the  word  of  Jesus 
Christ  to  Peter  in  person:  "Thou  art  Peter,  and  upon  this  rock 
I  will  build  my  church,'*  and  after  eighteen  centuries'  existence, 


THE  KEY   TO  TllUE  CHRISTIANITY.  9]_ 

behold,  to-day,  this  last  creation  of  God,  perfect  as  when  it  was 
organized  by  Him,  at  its  birth,  the  teachers  scattered  over  the 
nations,  "  Go,  teach  all  nations,"  teaching  all  things  whatso- 
ever Christ  commanded  them — the  taught,  hearing  with  docility 
"  all  the  things,"  knowing  that,  in  hearing  the  teachers,  they  hear 
Jesus  Christ,  and  in  despising  them  they  despise  Him,  whilst  be- 
hold re-enacted  at  the  close  of  the  nineteenth  century  what  was 
enacted  in  the  person  of  Peter  in  the  first — his  259th  successor 
virtually  a  prisoner  to-day — Peter  again  in  chains — whilst  Caesar 
and  the  world  rejoice,  for  this  is  their  hour — the  hour  of  dark- 
ness. Can  the  identity  of  this  institution  at  the  close  of  the 
nineteenth  century  be  misapprehended  ?  Impossible,  unless  by 
the  mind  that  wilfully  rejects  the  light. 

But  whilst  this  organization  preserves  its  outward  lineaments 
during  this  immense  space  of  time,  yet  there  are  millions  of  well- 
disposed  persons  who  firmly  believe  that  the  work  of  God  has 
long  since  failed  in  its  mission — that  the  church  prevaricated — 
taught  error,  became  anti-Christ,  &c.  Overlooking  the  compli- 
ment paid  to  her  Divine  spouse  in  making  such  charges  as  these, 
did  you  ever,  I  ask,  observe  any  of  the  other  creations  of  God 
deviate  from  its  course  and  end  ?  Have  they  not  always  responded 
to  the  laws  of  their  Creator  ?  And  may  it  not  be  safely  pre- 
sumed, too,  that  this  Creation  of  God,  like  all  others,  will  respond 
to  the^  designs  of  its  Creator  ?  That  God  is  its  sole  architect  is 
undeniable.  He  declares  His  intention  to  lay  its  foundation  in  a 
certain  and  definite  form ;  He  declares  it,  afterwards,  laid,  and  as 
the  Creator,  He  commands  all  men  to  submit  to  the  directions  of 
that  teacher.  But  we  may,  perhaps,  be  deceived  in  this  teacher 
and  her  teachings  ?  This  is  impossible.  Hear  what  He  says  of 
this  teacher  :  He  that  heareth  you,  heareth  me.  Again,  will  you 
believe  Him  if  He  promise  that  this  teacher  cannot  err  ?  Or  reject- 
ing His  promises,  do  you  prefer  to  be  guided  by  the  blind  instincts 
of  antipathy  and  hatred  with  which,  during  life,  you  have  pam- 
pered your  soul  against  the  work  of  God  ;  you,  who  cannot  fur- 
nish one  presentable  proof  in  favor  of  the  religious  views  that  you 
have  heretofore  held  ?  Hear,  now,  the  words  of  your  Redeemer, 
God,  and  let  them  in  warning  tones,  sink  deeply  into  your  soul. 
"And  behold!  I  am  with  you  all  days  even  to  the  end  of  the 
world."     These  words  were  addressed  to  the  apostles  and  their 


92 


THE    KEY  TO   TRUE   CHRISTIANITY. 


successors,  who  were  to  continue  teaching  all  things  Jesus  Christ 
commanded  them,  to  the  end  of  the  world.  The  end  of  the 
world  has  not  yet  arrived.  The  commission  to  teach  holds  good 
till  then.  He  who  gave  this  order  to  teach  prefaced  it  by  words 
declaratory  of  His  own  omnipotence:  "All  power  is  given  me 
in  heaven  and  on  earth."  Go,  ye,  therefore^  teach,  &c.,  that  is, 
because  I  as  God-man  possess  all  power — you  have  nothing  to 
fear:  "/  shall  always  be  with  you."  1  pledge  my  sacred  word 
that  I  shall  abide  permanently  with  you  to  the  last  hour  of  this  earth's 
existence.  Go  ye^  therefore^  &c.  No  monarch  ever  issued  such 
a  command  as  this — it  presupposes  the  empire  of  the  world  and 
even  declares  it  in  express  language,  "  All  power  is  given  me." 
The  promise  couched  is  in  the  language  of  an  undisputed  master, 
and  it  is  kept  by  Him  as  a  God. 

Now  one  of  two  things  is  true :  the  promise  here  made  was  either 
kept  or  broken ;  li  kept,  then  He  is  with  this  teacher,  created  by 
Himself,  teaching  either  truth  or  falsehood  ;  if  she  continue  to 
teach  the  truth,  the  fulfilment  of  the  promise  is  realized  ;  Christ 
is  with  her  teaching  truth.  But  if  she  fell  from  her  high  voca- 
tion— if  the  motives  of  Christ  in  her  creation  have  failed,  the 
first  work  of  omnipotence  that  ever  failed  (forbid,  O  God  !  the 
blasphemy),  then  Christ,  to  keep  His  word,  must  be  with  her 
teaching  falsehood  for  over  a  thousand  years  !  How  does  that 
inevitable  conclusion  (your  conclusion)  suit  ?  The  God  of  Truth, 
truth  essentially,  forsooth,  superintending  the  dissemination  of 
errors  for  an  indefinable  period  !  He  kept  His  promise,  and  His 
church  has  been  immersed  in  idolatry,  &c.,  and  Divine  truth  has 
actually  changed  places  with  the  spirit  of  darkness,  and  is  super- 
vising the  teaching  of  idolatry  for,  perhaps,  fifteen  centuries. 
Can  any  blasphemy  surpass  this  ?  I  once  heard  a  wretched  man " 
in  his  anger,  taking  off  his  hat,  curse  his  Maker  and  the  Heavens. 
He  cursed,  but  as  soon  as  his  wrath  subsided,  the  poor  wretch 
regretted,  in  the  bitterness  of  his  soul,  his  blasphemy.  But  what 
is  to  be  thought  of  those  who,  with  deliberation,  live  their  whole 
lives  declaring  that  God  failed  in  the  last  of  His  works,  and,  as 
St.  Paul  says,  "  He  died  for  His  church,  that  she  might  be  holy 
and  unspotted" — therefore  spilt  His  blood  in  vain  ?  Behold  the 
direct  consequence  of  Christ  having  kept  His  word,  in  combina- 
tion with  your  principles  ;  but  should  we  for  one  moment  assume 


THE    KEY  TO    THUE   CHRISTIANITY.  gg 

the  alternative,  viz. :  that  He  broke  it,  then  He  vi^as  not  God, 
and  Christianity  is  the  grossest  imposition  that  has  ever  been 
palmed  ofF  on  the  credulity  of  man.  Which  horn  of  the  dilemma^ 
reverend  sir,  will  you  choose  ?  Your  principles  impale  you,  of 
necessity,  on  either. 

Nor  is  the  foundation  of  the  teaching  church  dependent  on 
this  promise  alone.  Speaking  of  the  church,  Jesus  Christ  says 
that  "  The  gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail  against  her."  Did  He, 
as  Creator,  make  any  such  promise  for  any  of  His  other  crea- 
tions ?  And  yet,  although  this  sacred  pledge  was  given  by  God 
Himself,  how  many  are  they  who  seek  to  persuade  themselves 
and  teach  others  that  this  is  one  of  the  meaningless  nothings  ut- 
tered by  Jesus  Christ :  they  forget  His  words :  "  The  heavens 
and  earth  will  pass  away,  but  My  words  will  not  pass."  He,  of 
course,  broke  the  promise,  too.  Oh  !  the  blasphemy  underlying 
a  religion  that  professes  to  adore  a  God  who  possessed  neither  the 
power  nor  self-respect  to  keep  His  promises  ! 

Again,  the  Holy  Ghost,  whom  Jesus  Christ  calls  the  "  Spirit  of 
Truth,"  is  promised  to  be  with  this  teaching  body,  not  during  their 
life-time  alone,  hut  forever.  "I  will  send  you  the  Spirit  of  Truth, 
who  will  teach  you  all  truth  ^  and  He  will  abide  with  you  for  ever. ^^ 
The  same  argument  which  I  made  use  of  when  referring  to  the 
perpetual  superintendence  of  the  Son  of  God  over  His  church, 
is,  verbatim  et  literatim.^  applicable  to  the  Holy  Ghost,  viz.  :  If 
that  church  ever  did  teach  error,  then  the  Holy  Ghost  Is  super- 
vising the  work,  that  is.  He  Is  now,  and  has  been  for  several  cen- 
turies, substituting  Himself  for  the  spirit  of  darkness.  Imperson- 
ating him  ''who  was  a  liar  from  the  beginning."  Are  you,  rever- 
end sir,  prepared  for  the  inevitable  conclusion?  This  blasphemy? 
But  it  is  the  necessary  consequence  of  your  own  cherished  bib- 
lical principles,  or  if  the  Holy  Ghost  be  not  found  thus  occupied, 
then  necessarily  once  more,  Christ,  who  made  that  promise  of 
the  permanent  abiding  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  for  the  purpose  of 
teaching.  His  church  all  truth  .^  and  for  ever  .^  is  either  wanting  In 
the  truth  or  In  the  power  to  make  good  His  promise,  hence  He 
cannot  be  God,  being  deprived  of  the  necessary  attributes  of  Truth 
and  Omnipotence — hence  His  religion  is  false,  being  founded  on 
a  false  basis — hence  Christianity  is  an  imposition,  and  the  most 
self-stultifying  that  ever  found  place  on  this  earth.    The  system  of 


94  TIIE   KEY  TO   TRUE   CHRISTIANITY. 

Christianity  you  represent,  reverend  sir,  being  based  on  the  failure 
of  the  church  of  Christ,  in  teaching  the  truth,  must  assume  the 
responsibihty,  before  mankind^  of  all  the  terrible  but  necessary  con- 
sequences referred  to,  but,  before  God^  what  can  I  say  of  the 
repeated  blasphemies  ? 

Again,  reconcile  the  language  of  St.  Paul,  speaking  of  the 
church  of  Christ,  which  he  called  the  Church  of  the  Living 
God,  the  pillar  and  the  ground  of  the  truth,  ist  Ep.  Timothy,  3 
c.  15  v.,  with  the  blasphemy  that  declares  the  utter  failure  of  the 
last,  best,  most  dearly  cherished,  of  all  the  creations  of  God  ! 
To  comment  on  this  further  would  be  to  throw  a  veil  over  its 
turpitude.  Again,  St.  Paul,  writing  to  the  Ephesians,  says: 
"  Christ  loved  the  church,  and  delivered  himself  up  for  it,"  etc., 
that  it  should  be  a  glorious  churchy  not  having  spot  or  wrinkle^  hut  it 
should  be  holy  and  awj-/)^//^^/ (Ephesians  5  c,  25,  26,  27  v.)  For 
the  first  time  since  God  became  a  Creator  He  has  failed  in  His 
work — perhaps  His  omnipotence  was  exhausted.  O  God  !  into 
what  contradictions,  absurdities  and  impieties  will  not  error  lead 
men.  It  is  thus  they  value  Thy  labors,  toils,  life  and  death.  O 
Lord  !  surely,  when  pendent  from  the  cross  Thou  didst  pray  for 
Thy  enemies.  Thou  didst  pray  for  these  very  people,  who  by  an 
unheard-of  refinement  of  deicide,  pretend  to  worship  Thee,  the 
breaker  of  so  many  sacred  pledges  ! 

Your  religion,  reverend  sir,  is  emphatically  and  literally  built 
on  these  broken  promises,  and  sooner  than  that  I  should  assume 
for  a  moment  so  impious  a  position,  I  would  infinitely  prefer  to 
reject  all  notion  of  a  revelation,  and  declare  myself  a  rationalist. 
Which  of  the  two  is  preferable  and  more  consistent,  to  deny  rev- 
elation or  to  adore  an  untruthful  God  \  Horrible  !  yet  this  is 
the  ultimate  but  inevitable  result  of  your  principles.  Principles, 
did  I  say  ?  my  previous  letters  have  demonstrated  that  you  pos- 
sess nbt  one  principle  whereon  to  rest  an  act  of  faith,  and  yet 
your  tongue  and  pen  are  ceaseless  in  their  abuse  of  this  "  glori- 
ous and  unspotted  "  creation  of  God  !  Please  hereafter  to  do 
your  crucified  Redeemer  the  justice  to  believe  Him  truthful^ — 
grant  him,  at  least,  what  you  would  to  any  of  your  fellow-men 
for  whom  you  entertain  the  slightest  respect.  Allow  His  prom- 
ises to  His  church  to  stand,  and  let  Him  enjoy  the  reputation 
(whatever  may  be  your  private  opinion  to  the  contrary)  of  having 


THE  KEY   TO  TRUE  CHRISTIA.NITY.  g^ 

kept  His  sacred  word  to  this'  the  cherished  of  all  His  crea- 
tions. Surely,  if  it  be  true  that  practice  makes  perfect,  kindly 
fccord  to  Him  the  result  of  four  thousand  years'  observation  of 
the  workings  of  His  other  creations,  and  by  the  end  of  so  long 
an  experience,  accord  to  Him  perfection  in  this  work  also,  espe- 
cially as  His  sacred  word  is  so  often  pledged  for  its  indefectibility, 
and  being  under  His  and  the  Holy  Spirit's  guardianship,  trust 
Him  that  it  can  never  teach  error.  In  a  word,  there  is  falsehood 
somewhere.  If  the  church  created  by  Jesus  Christ  on  this  earth 
has  ever  taught  one  particle  of  error,  count  me  out  as  a  believer 
in  revelation,  but  if  the  promises  of  Jesus  Christ  were  not  bro- 
ken— then  may  God  have  mercy  on  the  traducers  of  His  holy  name  I 

The  S^^n  of  God  has,  then,  laid  on  this  earth  the  foundation 
of  a  definite  organization  for  the  purpose  of  teaching  mankind  all 
the  truth  His  heavenly  Father  commanded,  to  the  end  of  time. 
His  sacred  word  is  repeatedly  pledged  that  this  institution  can 
never  teach  aught  but  truth.  The  introduction  of  error  is  there- 
fore an  impossibility.  We  are  ^//,  in  every  age,  and  everywhere, 
commanded  to  hear  her  teachers.  "He  that  believeth  not  shall 
be  condemned."  There  is  no  resource  now  left  us,  since  the 
biblical  sjfstem  has  been  proved  a  "  mockery,  a  delusion,  and 
a  snare." 

And  now,  reverend  sir,  let  me  show  you  how,  without  reason- 
ing in  a  circle,  I  arrive  at  the  conclusion  that  the  apostolic 
writings  are  of  divine  origin.  Observe  that  in  quoting  Matthew, 
etc.,  in  this  letter,  I  merely  used  their  testimony  as  that  of  truth- 
ful historians.  They,  as  such,  furnished  me  with  the  knowledge 
of  a  creation  of  God — a  teaching  church — established  by  Him- 
self, perpetually  supervised  by  Him  and  the  Holy  Spirit  as  long 
as  time  will  last,  pledged  by  His  sacred  word  never  to  teach 
error — that  sacred  word  is  the  basis  of  my  faith  ;  the  breaking  of 
that  sacred  word  is  the  basis  of  yours.  "If  the  testimony  of  man 
is  to  be  received,  how  much  more  the  testimony  of  God."  Now 
this  perfect  work  of  God — this  unerring  teacher — assures  me  that 
the  spirit  of  God  participated  in  the  writings  of  those  witnesses, 
Matthew,  Mark,  etc.,  and  as  God's  word  is  pledged  that  she  can- 
not err  in  her  teaching,  I  must  unequivocally  accept  this  her  decla- 
ration. Where  is  the  vicious  circle  here  ?  That  assertion  is  made 
either   in   ignorance  of  the  nature  of  a  vicious  circle  or  in  bad 


9g  THE  KEY  TO  TRUE  CHRISTIANITY. 

faith.  We  reason  in  a  vicious  circle,  when  we  use  two  doubtful 
propositions  to  prove  each  other  ;  but  here  there  is  nothing  of 
the  kind  ;  our  premises  are  admitted  by  our  opponents,  viz. :  tHI 
truthful  testimony  of  the  historians,  Matthew,  etc.,  and  with  the 
aid  of  their  testimony  we  arrive  infallibly  at  the  conclusion,  that 
the  foundations  of  a  new  creation  were  laid  by  God  Himself,  in 
their  day,  viz. :  a  teaching  church,  which  is  nothing  more  than 
his  mouth-piece,  his  voice — and  having  secured,  with  absolute 
certainty^  the  knowledge  of  this  divine  teacher  from  the  histori- 
ans, I  learn  from  this  supernatural  teacher  that  the  historians 
were  efficiently  aided  by  the  Holy  Ghost  in  their  work.  Had  I 
assumed  the  inspiration  of  the  scriptures,  and  thence  proved  the 
church,  etc.,  I  would  be  justly  charged  with  reasoning  in  a  circle. 
Evidently  I  have  done  nothing  of  the  kind.  Hence  the  absurdity 
of  the  charge. 

And  now,  reverend  sir,  it  is  high  time  this  trifling  with  my  pa- 
tience and  time  and  that  of  the  public  should  cease.  At  the  end 
of  over  two  months  you  bring  forward  to-day  proofs  for  the  in- 
spiration of  the  scriptures  which  vanish  like  flax  before  the  fire. 

Your  time  was  thrown  away  in  the  discussion  of  subjects 
that  right  order  and  the  laws  of  debate  summarily  ignore,  but 
it  seems  that  an  end  was  to  be  subserved,  viz. :  dust  was  to 
be  thrown  in  the  eyes  of  the  illiterate  and  prejudiced,  and  I  en- 
tertain no  sympathy  for  a  cause  that  would  impose  on  its  sup- 
porters such  a  task  as  this.  I  therefore  declare  this  discussion 
closed,  from  the  utter  inability  on  your  part  to  comply' with  the 
terms  of  the  arrangement  made  with  me. 

I,  however,  hereby  hold  myself  obliged  to  renew  it,  on  condi- 
tion that  you  produce  tangible  proofs  for  the  inspiration  of  the 
scriptures.  The  public  recognize  the  utter  failure  to  do  so  hith- 
erto ;  but  should  you,  in  the  future,  find  proofs  that  will  cover 
the  inspiration  of  the  new  testament,  then  I  hold  myself  under 
obligation  to  resume  the  discussion. 

BespectfuUj, 

M.  O'KEEFE. 


THE  KEY  TO  TRUE  CHRISTIANITY.  QJ 

DEFENDERS  OF  THE  FAITH.— FATHER  O'KEEFE 
IN  REPLY  TO  A  PROTESTANT  LAYMAN. 

NORFOLK,  SEPTExMBER   30,  1873. 

Editor  Norfolk  Journal:  My  attention  was  called  to- 
day to  a  communication  signed  "  A  Protestant  Layman,"  and 
addressed  to  you,  wherein  I  read  the  following  :  "  I  was  so 
much  gratified  by  the  communication  of  your  correspondent  '  A' 
in  your  paper  of  the  28th  instant,  in  which  he  gave  a  striking 
expose  of  some  of  Mr.  O'Keefe's  inconsistencies  in  his  contro- 
versy with  Dr.  Blackwell,"  &c. 

Mr.  editor,  I  have  examined  with  some  care  the  letter  of  "  A," 
and  must  confess  that  I  can  find  therein  "the  some  inconsisten- 
cies" referred  to,  only  in  the  corrected  text,  and  in  the  explana- 
tion of  the  words,  "  Lo  !  I  am  with  you  alway,  even  to  the  end 
of  the  world  ;"  which,  if  they  be  inconsistencies,  are  his  own  as 
well  as  mine.  This  failure  on  my  part  may  be  owing  to  want  of 
clearness  of  perception,  or  after  all,  possibly,  to  the  great  gratifi- 
cation which  the  writer  felt  and  which  very  naturally  exaggerated 
the  "some  inconsistencies."  If  "A  Protestant  Layman"  was 
so  much  gratified,  &c.,  I  can  assure  him  I  was  equally  so  in 
securing  so  able  an  advocate  in  defending  his  or  my  "incon- 
sistencies." 

Towards  the  close  of  his  communication  your  correspondent 
uses  the  following  language :  "  I  could  have  wished  that  your 
correspondent  had  passed  over  this  point  and  confined  himself  to 
exposing  the  glaring  instance  of  the  '•  petitto  principii^  furnished  us 
by  Mr.  O'K.,  which  he  does  so  successfully." 

Now,  I  beg  leave  to  request  "A  Protestant  Layman"  to  put 
aside  his  prejudices  and  impartially  discuss  with  me  this  "glaring 
instance  of  petitio  principii'*  or  vicious  circle  with  which  I  am 
charged. 

What  is  a  vicious  circle  ?  Dr.  Watts  in  his  "  Treatise  on 
Logic,"  defines  it  thus :  A  vicious  circle  is  "  when  two  proposi- 
tions, equally  uncertain,  are  used  to  prove  each  other."  Now, 
what  was  my  mode  of  reasoning  that  evinced  this  glaring  instance 
of  petitio  principii?  It  was  this  :  A  reliable  historian,  Matthew, 
records  the  establishment  by  God  Himself,  of  an  institution  over 
which  He  (God)  pledges   His  perpetual  superintendence  to  the 

7 


gg  THE  KEY  TO  TRUE  CHEISTIANITY. 

end  of  the  world,  with  the  assurance  that  she  (His  church)  can 
never  teach  error,  because  "the  gates  of  hell  cannot  prevail 
against  her."  Now,  the  catholic  and  protestant  believe  the  his- 
torian, Matthew,  to  be  truthful,  and  the  catholic,  moreover,  be- 
lieves that  the  recorded  words  of  Christ  mean  an  unerring  church. 
To  him,  there  can  be  now  no  doubt  that  an  infallible  teacher 
exists,  which  he  is  commanded  to  hear.  By  virtue  of  this  autho- 
rity invested  in  her  by  Christ,  she  teaches  that  the  apostolic 
writings  are  the  joint  product  of  the  Holy  Ghost  and  their  re- 
spective writers.  Thus  do  we  prove  that  the  apostolic  writings 
are  inspired. 

Dr.  Watts'  definition  of  a  vicious  circle  has  no  place  here, /or 
I  do  not  assume  two  propositions  equally  uncertain^  but  I  take  for  my 
premises  the  testimony  of  the  historian  Matthew,  accepted  as  in- 
disputable by  the  protestant  and  myself,  whose  testimony  places 
me  in  possession  of  an  infallibly-teaching  church,  as  a  fact  vouched 
for  hy  God  Himself;  assuming  now  as  a  principle  that,  of  which 
there  can  be  no  doubt,  viz. :  the  infallible  teacher,  I  hear  the 
voice  of  the  teacher,  divinely  created,  informing  me  that  certain 
writings,  known  now-a-days  as  the  bible,  are  of  divine  origin. 

"A  Protestant  Layman"  will  see  that  I  have  not  used  the 
bible  to  prove  the  infallible  church  ;  for  I  have  used  only  two 
expressions  of  the  Redeemer,  recorded  by  a  historian,  Matthew, 
regarded  as  reliable  and  veracious  by  "A  Protestant  Layman" 
equally  with  myself. 

In  a  word,  there  is  not  the  shadow  of  a  vicious  circle,  accord- 
ing to  the  definition  of  Dr.  Watts,  to  be  discovered  in  my  rea- 
soning, seeing  that,  of  the  two  propositions,  one  is  regarded  as 
certain  by  "  A  Protestant  Layman,"  as  well  as  by  myself,  viz. : 
the  truthfulness  of  the  historian  Matthew :  whereas  it  is  necessary 
to  the  definition  of  a  vicious  circle  that  both  propositions  should  be  equally 
uncertain. 

Call  my  reasoning  faulty,  or  what  else  you  please,  but  be  silent 
evermore  as  regards  the  charge  of  vicious  circle  or  "petitio  prin- 
cipii,"  where  catholics  are  concerned,  for  our  reasoning  lacks  the 
•essential  qualities  of  a  vicious  circle,  viz. :  two  propositions  equally 
uncertain. 

Respectfully, 

M.  O'KEEFE. 


THE   KEY  TO  TRUE   CHRISTIANITY.  99 

NORFOLK,   OCTOBER  8th,  1873. 
REV.  MATTHEW  O'KEEFE. 

Dear  Sir:  The  first  point  I  consider  is  your  criticism  of 
some  scriptures  presented  in  my  last.  In  the  first  column  of 
yours  of  September  24th  you  object  to  the  meaning  of  the  Greek 
word  "  anothen,'*  and  say,  "  Your  own  text  contradicts  you,  and 
the  lexicon  bears  out  your  own  text."  I  have  just  consulted 
three  lexicons — two  of  classic  and  one  of  new  testament  Greek — 
and  all  give  "  above"  and  "  from  above"  as  the  first  meaning  of 
that  Greek  word.  Also,  if  you  will  take  the  pains  to  refer  to 
your  own  Douay  bible,  or  to  our  English  version  either,  you  will 
find  at  John  3  c.  31  v.,  and  19  c.  11  v.,  and  at  James  i  c.  17  v. 
and  3  c.  15  and  17  v. — in  these  five  places — that  both  bibles 
render  that  word  by  the  phrase  "from  above."  Again,  if  you» 
will  carefuUly  read  the  first  three  verses  of  Luke's  gospel  you  will 
see  nothing  whatever  contradicting  the  supposition  that  St.  Luke 
gained  his  "  perfect  understanding  of  all  things  from  above,"  or 
from  the  spirit  of  truth.  He  states  that  many  having  written 
"those  things  which  are  most  surely  believed  among  us,  even  as 
they  delivered  them  unto  us,  which  from  the  beginning  were  eye- 
witnesses and  ministers  of  the  word,  it  seemed  good  to  me  also, 
having  had  perfect  understanding  of  all  things  from  the  very  first, 
to  write,"  &c.  Instead  of  "  from  the  very  first,"  I  render  it 
"  from  above."  In  so  doing  I  am  sustained  by  some  eminent 
scholars,  and  also  by  the  leading  or  primary  meaning  of  the 
Greek  word ;  while  the  fact,  if  admitted,  that  Luke  gained  his 
information  from  "  eye-witnesses  and  ministers  of  the  word," 
does  not  preclude  the  necessity  of  the  aid  of  the  Holy  Spirit  to 
teach  him  what  and  how  to  write.  Without  the  aid  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  he  might  have  written  as  Barnabas  did,  of  which  more 
hereafter.  John  and  Peter  were  eye-witnesses,  and  yet  they 
needed  the  Spirit  to  guide  them  in  writing  scripture. 

But  I  do  not  insist  upon  that  interpretation  of  the  word — it  is 
not  at  all  necessary.  I  am  willing  to  admit  that  you  and  the  trans- 
lators of  our  bibles  are  correct  here ;  but  I  have  not  the  slightest 
difficulty  in  believing  that  gospels  written  during  that  age  of  in- 
spiration by  the  companions  of  Peter  and  Paul — who  taught  that 


•iQQ  THE   KEY   TO   TKUE   CHRISTIANITY. 

all  scripture  was  divinely  inspired  ;  that  "holy  men  of  God  spake 
inspired  by  the  Holy  Ghost " — that  gospels  written  by  the  chosen 
companions  of  such  men,  and  received  as  a  portion  of  the  sacred 
scriptures,  while  these  chiefest  apostles,  Peter,  John  and  Paul, 
yet  presided  over  the  churches — I  have  no  difficulty  in  believing 
that  such  gospels  are  inspired  by  the  Holy  Ghost. 

Respectfully, 

J.  D.  BLACKWELL. 


NORFOLK,  Oct.  14th,  1873. 
PROPRIETORS  OF  THE  VIR£IINIAN  : 

Gentlemen  : — I  address  you  this  letter  rather  than  Rev.  Dr. 
Blackwell,  inasmuch  as,  having  perused  his  letter,  I  see  nothing 
therein  to  induce  me  to  change  my  determination,  as  the  sequel 
*will  prove. 

I  adopted,  in  my  last  letter,  the  resolution  to  abandon  the  dis- 
cussion, conditionally^  for  a  two-fold  motive  :  1st.  In  order  to  call 
public  attention  to  the  continued  flagrant  violation  of  the  laws  of 
discussion  by  my  reverend  opponent ;  and,  2d.  With  the  hope 
that  the  reverend  gentleman  would  bestir  himself  to  furnish  the 
quota  of  the  work  voluntarily  assumed  by  him  in  the  beginning 
of  the  discussion,  but  towards  which  he  has  not  contributed  yet 
one  iota,  as  the  letter  of  to-day  too  abundantly  evinces. 

I  was  not  a  little  amused  by  the  sang  froid  displayed  by  my 
reverend  antagonist  in  his  card,  wherein  he  asserts  that  it  is  ne- 
cessary for  him  to  reply  to  my  letters,  etc.  Were  I  not  certain 
that  the  gentleman  was  keenly  alive  to  the  anomaly  of  his 
situation,  I  would  be  disposed  to  admire  his  childlike  simplicity ; 
but  knowing  from  experience  his  determtnation  to  hold  on  with 
death-like  tenacity  to  his  cuttle-fish  tactics,  and  to  "  brazen  it 
out "  to  the  end,  I  feel  it  my  duty  to  put  the  public  once  more 
on  their  guard  against  his  subtleties  and  so-called  Jesuit  prac- 
tices ;  and  for  this  purpose  I  will  summarize  the  discussion  as 
concisely  as  possible.  The  reverend  gentleman's  morbid  hatred 
for  the  catholic  church,  not  finding  a  safety-valve  sufficiently  ca- 
pacious here,  he  availed  himself,  a  few  months  since,  of  a  com- 
munication containing  some  questions  proposed  anonymously,  to 
open  a  correspondence  with  a  methodist  paper,  published  in  Rich- 


THE  KEY  TO  TRUE  CHRISTIANITY.  201 

mond,  through  letters  addressed  by  him  to  a  catholic,  manufac- 
tured for  the  occasion  ;  and  although  assured  that  the  writer  was 
no  catholic,  such  was  his  mania  for  ventilating  his  hatred  of  Ro- 
manism, that  his  conscience  readily  compromised  with  the  impo- 
sition to  be  practiced  upon  thousands,  perhaps  (the  more  the  bet- 
ter), of  readers  J  and  in  these  letters,  with  an  ungentlemanly 
public  appeal  to  the  catholic  priests  residing  in  Norfolk,  he 
invites  them  to  go  out  in  the  highways  to  amuse  him  and  others 
(Herod-like)  by  the  performance  of  miracles,  and  this  without  the 
slightest  acquaintance  with  any  one  of  us.  This  conduct  an  intel- 
ligent public  will,  with  me,  stigmatize  as  a  most  unwarrantable 
liberty  with  strangers. 

As  soon  as  my  attention  was  directed  to  two  or  three  of  these 
productions,  I  called  the  gentleman  to  an  account  for  it  ;  and  to 
furnish  him  an  opportunity  to  ventilate  his  furore  against  the  church 
and  at  the  same  time  indulge  his  ^^ cacoethes  scr'ihendi^''  I  proposed 
that  we  discuss  the  merits  of  our  relative  systems  of  belief,  and 
thus  give  the  gentleman  a  flesh  and  blood  catholic  antagonist  to 
grapple  with.  The  gentleman  endeavored  stoutly  to  maintain 
that  his  correspondent  was  a  catholic,  and  went  so  far  as  to  de- 
clare that  a  jury  would  convict  him  as  such.  Now  I  desire  to 
be  distinctly  understood,  when  I  assure  the  public  that  a  more 
unwarrantable  assertion  never  emanated  from  the  pen  or  lips  of 
any  man,  and  not  only  do  I  assert  the  fact,  but  I  declare  that  the 
intimate  friends  of  the  writer  are  ready  to  testify  that  the  gentle- 
man openly  exults  in  his  declaration  of  infidelity,  that  is,  in  a 
denial  of  all  revelation — a  position  wherein  I  would  be  found 
to-day,  were  I  not  a  catholic,  and  so  said  the  great  St.  Augustine: 
"  I  would  not  believe  the  gospel,  had  not  the  authority  of  the 
catholic  church  moved  me  thereto."  Who  ever  saw  the  man 
who  was  a  catholic  and  at  the  same  time  denied  revelation  ?  The 
supposition  is  an  absurdity.  But  the  assertion  served  a  purpose, 
the  end  justified  the  means  ;  in  this  particular  he  could  afford  to 
be  more  Jesuitical  that  the  Jesuits  themselves.  The  only  re- 
source now  left  the  gentleman,  in  self-vindication,  is  to  publish  that 
communication,  and  let  the  public  occupy  the  place  of  jury  in 
the  case.  I  repeat,  that  neither  that  communication  nor  the 
writer's  clearly-defined  opinions,  unhesitatingly  expressed  amongst 
his  friends,  could  warrant  any  such  assertion. 


2Q2  THE    KEY  TO    TKUE   CHEISTIANITY. 

Notwithstanding  the  acknowledged  caution  of  his   friend  and 
my  exposure  of  the  pious  fraud,  at  the  time  of  his  arraignment 
by  me,  the  statement  was  persevered  in,  and  I  now  feel  in  the  po- 
sition to  maintain  that  the  catholic  was  manufactured  "out  of  the 
whole  cloth,"  and  I  leave  the  reverend  gentleman  to  lie  contented, 
if  so  disposed,  on  the  bed  of  thorns  which  he  has  made  for  him- 
self.    I  am  thus  explicit,  in  order  to  show  to  the  public  how 
consistently  with  this  specimen  of  moral  "  Colfaxing  "  a  christian 
gentleman  can  comport   himself  during  a   discussion  of  months' 
continuance.     My  proposition  to  discuss  was  accepted,  and  I  was 
proffered  the  choice  of  subject,  which  I  chose,  viz.:   ist.  The 
inspiration   of  the  bible.     2d.  The   canon.     3d.  The  right  of 
private  judgment  to  interpret    it  when   proved  to  be  of  divine 
origin.     The   gentleman  accepted   my  offer  by  the  appearance 
of  a  letter    over    his    signature.       But    before    I    proceed    fur- 
ther,  it   is   my  duty  to  explain  to  the   public   once  more  that 
the   cardinal   rules  of   discussion^   whether  of  an  oral   or  writ- 
ten character,   demand   the   most   scrupulous   adherence  to  the 
question   under    discussion,    a-nd    forbid    the    slightest    violation 
thereof  by  the   introduction  of  any   matter   extraneous   to   the 
question   at  issue.     This   rule  was  never  disputed,   but   never, 
to   my  knowledge,  was  it  so   openly  and  shamefully  violated  as 
during  the  discussion,  by  my  reverend  opponent.      He  accepted 
unhesitatingly  the  question  to  be   discussed,  and   the  choice   of 
which   was   by  himself  proffered  to  me ;  we  were  therefore  to 
confine  ourselves  to  the  inspiration  of  the  bible  from  his  stand- 
point, and  after  this  had  been   satisfactorily  maintained   by  the 
reverend  gentleman,  he  was  to  proceed  with  the  proofs  of  the 
two  other  points.     But  when  his  first  letter  put  in  an  appearance, 
what  do  we  behold  ?     He  began  that  letter  in  open  violation  of 
all  the  laws  of  discussion,  by  attacking  the  rule  of  faith  of  the 
catholic  church,  which  was  an  intolerable  breach  of  the  law,  for 
the  catholic  church  should  not  have  been  mentioned  even  in  that 
letter ;  she  was  not  on  her  trial ;  her  day  was  to  come  ;  but  the 
inspiration  of  the  bible  was  to  be  proved,  and  that  letter  was  to 
have  been  devoted  exclusively  to  that  subject.    Anyhow  a  corner 
was  appropriated  to  proofs  of  the  inspiration  of  the  scriptures — and 
such  proofs !     Well  indeed  ought  the  reverend  gentleman  be  silent 
evermore  as  regards  them,  and  leave  them  in  the  mass  of  ruins 


THE  KEY  TO  TRUE  CHRISTIANITY. 


103 


with  which  I  overwhelmed  them.  Before  the  gentleman  com- 
menced to  pen  that  letter,  his  eyes  were  opened  to  the  appalling 
situation  in  which  he  had  involved  himself.  It  was  either  the 
honest  admission  that  he  was  unequal  to  the  task  assigned  him, 
or  the  adoption  of  the  cuttle-fish  tactics,  which  might,  after  all, 
carry  him  through  the  discussion  with  the  prejudiced  and  ignorant, 
at  least.  A  drowning  man  will  grasp  at  a  straw,  and  why  not, 
with  a  certain  amount  of  brass,  succeed  as  well  as  he  did  in  es- 
caping the  manufactured-catholic  difficulty  ? 

A  series  of  letters  from  the  pen  of  the  reverend  gentleman  fol- 
lowed this  one,  all  of  the  same  character,  all  occupied  with  mat- 
ter that  had  as  much  bearing  on  the  question  under  discussion  as 
a  dissertation  on  the  steam  engine  would  have,  there  and  then. 
In  fact,  I  was  never  before  able  to  realize  such  dogged  persistency 
in  a  want  of  candor  and  sincerity  as  characterized  my  reverend 
opponent's  conduct  during  the  discussion.  Let  the  high-toned 
reader  take  up  my  letters,  and  see  what  manner  of  man  I  had  to 
deal  with — a  constant  soliciting,  imploring,  entreating,  conjuring, 
scolding,  worrying,  to  induce  my  opponent  to  abandon  his  unwor- 
thy course,  and  betake  himself,  as  a  man^  to  the  work  he  had 
voluntarily  assumed,  but  unavailingly.  Letter  followed  letter, 
filled  with  irrelevant  matter,  but  not  one  word  for  the  subject 
of  debate,  which  alone  was  legitimate.  After  the  first  proofs 
were  disposed  of,  he  stated  that  he  held  other  proofs  in  reserve 
which  were  for  students  and  skeptics.  If  ever  there  were  need  of 
proofs  for  the  benefit  of  the  latter  class,  it  was  just  then,  for  his  shuf- 
fling course  from  the  beginning  had  so  helped  to  engender  skepti- 
cism, that  overwhelming  proofs  were,  indeed,  needful  to  counter- 
act it.  But  when,  after  ceaseless  expostulations,  which  almost  ex- 
haifsted  my  patience,  I  worried  out  of  him  some  further  attempts 
to  bolster  up  his  system,  these  so-called  irrefragible  proofs,  so  well 
calculated  to  fortify  and  illumine  students,  and  remove  the  doubts 
of  skeptics,  appeared  ;  what  was  their  value  ?  My  present  letter 
disposes  of  the  question,  and  I  assert  that  the  man  is  easily  ac- 
commodated who  could,  with  a  safe  conscience,  make  an  act  of 
faith  in  the  inspiration  of  the  new  testament  on  such  a  basis. 
But,  in  fact,  did  any  one  believe  in  the  existence  of  the  reserved 
proofs  so  well  ca.culated  to  put  the  quietus  on  skeptics  ?  Not  I 
surely  ;  not  the  public,  for  they  had  concluded  long  ago,  that  if 


204  TH^    KE"^  TO  TRUE   CHRISTIANITY. 

they  were  there,  so  much  teasing  would  not  be  necessary  to  bring 
them  forth,  and  last  of  all,  the  gentleman's  conscience  and  his  self- 
consciousness  both  bore  testimony  to  his  entire  unconsciousness  of 
their  existence,  and  he  has  to  thank  one  of  the  many  friends 
who  have  so  efficiently  aided  him  in  this  discussion,  for  his  kind 
offices  in  delivering  him  from  a  sad  plight,  by  furnishing  even 
the  sorry  pretexts  offered  to  maintain  the  inspiration  of  the  scrip- 
tures. Any  comment  on  the  above  would  only  serve  to  dim 
their  naturally  resplendent  brightness. 

Another  assertion  made  by  the  reverend  gentleman  in  a  very 
early  stage  of  the  discussion,  was  that  "God  directed"  His  word 
to  be  written.  Scarcely  a  letter  of  mine  appeared  after  this  as- 
sertion, wherein  I  did  not  harass  him,  to  death  almost,  for  the 
proof  of  the  assertion,  but  as  usual,  ineffectually,  yet  he  lacked 
the  candor  to  admit  his  errors,  and  the  assertion  remains,  to  his 
honor,  neither  proved  nor  admitted  to  be  false.  Sic  imus  ad  astra  ! 
But  the  most  sublime  of  all  the  gentleman's  attempts  at  sophis- 
try, is  the  ingenuity,  constant  and  persevering,  with  which  he 
endeavors  to  mislead  the  public  mind  from  the  true  issue.  / 
must  he  answered  forsooth.  The  gentleman  knew  in  his  heart  of 
hearts  that  he  had  only  one  answer  to  give^  and  that  was  to  furnish 
adequate  proofs  for  the  inspiration  of  the  scriptures,  and  one  letter 
would  have  sufficed  for  that  answer,  or  in  case  of  failure,  in  the 
hands  of  an  honest  and  candid  controversialist,  the  issue  would  have 
been  abandoned  ;  whereas,  the  success  of  that  effort  would  have 
authorized  the  gentleman  to  choose  for  himself,  for  discussion, 
some  teaching  of  the  catholic  church,  wherein  he  was  to  be 
plaintiff  and  I  defendant. 

Well,  indeed,  might  the  fournars  correspondent,  "  A,"  who, 
although  a  protestant  of  some  kind,  whilst  he  paid  him  the  com- 
pliment to  say,  substantially,  that  his  effort  to  prove  the  inspira- 
tion of  the  scriptures  was  an  entire  failure,  aver,  that  he  could 
not  understand  the  question  at  issue,  so  well  were  the  waters 
blacked  by  an  illimitable  effusion  of  the  cuttle-fish  tactics,  although 
had  the  writer  adverted  to  the  terms  of  the  discussion  drawn  up 
by  me  and  adopted  by  my  reverend  opponent,  he  could  not  for  a 
moment  plead  ignorance ;  anyhow,  "  A's"  threat  ''  to  go  for 
him"  was  thrown  away,  for  he  could  not  do  better  in  furnishing 
proofs.     Well,  too,  might  the  reverend  gentleman  imploringly 


THE   KEY  TO   TKUE   CHKISTIANITY.  ]^Q5 

look  in  the  face  of  "  A/'  and  cry  out  ^^  et  tu  Brute^^  in  the  words 
of  Julius  Caesar.  On  the  whole,  a  more  persistent  attempt  to 
hoodwink  a  community  into  the  belief  that  he  was  engaged  in 
legitimate  work  for  months,  was  never  before  attempted  in  the 
annals  of  controversy,  whilst  the  reverend  gentleman  when  re- 
tiring to  rest  on  his  laurels  will  have  the  consolation  to  feel  that 
the  world  now  sees,  through  his  instrumentality,  that  protestant- 
ism cannot  lay  claim  to  the  possession  of  one  syllable  of  Divine 
revelation,  as  long  as  it  preserves  its  present  status.  This  I  fore- 
told the  reverend  gentleman  at  first,  and  whilst  I  entertain  only 
charity  for  the  man,  I  cannot  forbear  expressing  other  than  extreme 
disgust  for  the  tactics  that  he  adopted  ah  initio ;  and  rather  than 
be  obliged  to  lend  myself  to  any  such  degrading  course  of  policy 
on  account  of  the  religion  I  professed,!  would  discard  the  religion 
as  unworthy  of  my  manhood,  because  I  would  feel  my  manhood 
insulted  and  polluted  by  contact  with  it. 

I  now  proceed  to  give  my  attention  to  the  effort  made  by  the 
reverend  gentleman  to  sustain  the  only  text  of  scripture  he  has 
brought  forward  in  three  months,  to  make  good  his  engagement. 
1st.  The  text  from  St.  Luke's  gospel  advanced  to  prove  his  in- 
spiration, and  which  I  demolished  so  effectually  from  St.  Luke's 
own  words,  is  admitted  by  the  reverend  gentleman  as  incapable 
of  "holding  water,"  in  these  words:  "I  am  willing  to  admit 
that  you  and  the  translators  of  our  bibles  are  correct  here." 
Therefore  St.  Luke  remains  uninspired.  Alas !  for  the  poor  bib- 
lical theory  !  2d.  As  regards  ist  Corinthians,  14th  chapter  and 
37th  verse  :  The  gentleman  almost  gives  up  the  proof,  but  I  will 
conclude  the  destruction  of  the  effort  by  St.  Paul's  words.  In 
the  same  epistle,  7th  chapter,  40th  verse,  the  apostle  says  of  him- 
self: "And,  I  think  ^  I  also  have  the  spirit  of  God."  What  more 
can  be  required  ?  Here  the  apostle  himself  plainly  implies  a 
doubt  as  to  whether  he  has  the  spirit  of  God.  "//^/wi,"  but  I 
may  be  mistaken ;  he  would  not  dare  to  make  an  act  of  faith  in 
his  own  inspiration,  but  our  reverend  friend,  with  so  many  oppor- 
tunities of  knowing  better  than  the  apostle^  has  no  doubt  of  his  inspira- 
tion. The  compliment  paid  the  apostle,  like  other  compliments, 
he  must  swallow  at  the  expense  of  his  veracity  !  So  much  for 
the  effort  to  bolster  up  the  second  proof — there  will  be  no  resur- 


2Qg  THE  KEY    TO    TEL'E    CH  EISTMKITY. 

rection  for  it.      And  now  let  me  devote  a  little  time  to  the  text 
of  Peter,  whereby  it  is  sought  to  canonize  St.  Paul's  epistles. 

That  the  interpretation,  or  rather  critical  translation  of  these 
words  may  be  placed  beyond  question,  I  refer  my  readers  to  St. 
PauPs  second  epistle  to  Timothy,  3  c.  16  v.,  where  he  says: 
"  All  scripture,  divinely  inspired,"  or  more  literally  and  hiore 
critically,  "  Every  writing,  divinely  inspired."  Now,  either 
this  expression  is  tautological,  or  the  first  words,  "  every  writing," 
are  taken  generically,  and  the  words  "  divinely  inspired"  are 
one  of  the  species  of  that  genus.  That  there  is  no  tautology  in 
the  expression,  and  that  the  distinction  between  writing  *'  divinely 
inspired,"  and  what  was  not  so,  was  clearly  intended  by  the 
apostle,  is  evident  from  the  preceding  verse,  where  he  says  to 
Timothy,  "  And  because  from  thy  infancy  thou  hast  known  the 
SACRED  scriptures,"  or  "writings."  Here  the  apostle  draws  the 
distinction  in  fact^  and  calls  the  writings  with  which  Timothy 
was  conversant  sacred^  as  distinct  from  those  that  were  not  so, 
and  in  the  following  verse  confirms  the  distinction  by  declaring 
"every  writing"  as  the  genus,  with  its  differentia  "divinely  in- 
spired." Let  us  now  apply  the  distinction  to  the  text  of  St. 
Peter.  He  says  nothing  of  the  writings  referred  to  by  him  as 
being  "inspired,"  in  the  first  place;  and  secondly,  if  there  were 
not  writings  of  St.  Paul  not  divinely  inspired^  why,  may  I  ask,  is 
not  the  epistle  of  Paul  to  the  Laodiceans  (now  extant,  and  of 
which  he  wrote  to  the  Colossians  requiring  them  to  read  it)  in- 
corporated amongst  the  inspired  epistles  of  St.  Paul,  on  the 
strength  of  this  text  of  Peter  ?  and  if  the  Holy  Ghost  inspired  all 
of  St.  Paul's  epistles  (that  is,  interpreting  the  words  of  Peter^s 
text  as  "  the  other  writings,"  to  signify  inspired  writings),  inas- 
much as  St.  Paul  declares  all  scriptures  divinely  inspired  to  be 
profitable,  &c.  Why,  I  ask,  did  the  Holy  Ghost  allow  the 
epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  written  by  the  same  Paul,  and  referred 
to  by  him  in  the  present  ist  Corinthians,  i  c.  5  v.,  if  inspired^  to 
be  lost  ?  Had  the  Holy  Spirit  so  little  regard  for  his  own  pro- 
ductions ?  What  proves  too  much  proves  nothing.  Either 
Peter  did  not  mean  by  the  term  "the  other  writings,"  inspired 
writings,  or  biblical  christians  are  guilty  of  the  crime  of  casting 
out  from  the  inspired  writings  the  epistle  to  the  Laodiceans, 
written  by  St.  Paul,  according  to  his   own  testimony,  and   the 


THE  KEY  TO  TEUE  CHRISTIANITY.  207 

Holy  Spirit  slighted  his  own  works  when  he  allowed  the  first  of 
the  three  epistles  written  by  Paul  to  the  Corinthians  to  be  lost. 
Which  horn  of  the  dilemma  is  the  less  irksome  to  be  impaled 
on  ? 

Let  us  see  the  practical  utility  of  the  text,  even  admitting  for 
the  sake  of  argument  all  the  force  that  can  be  given  it.  How 
many  epistles  of  St.  Paul  were  written  when  Peter  wrote  his  id 
epistle  ?  St.  Paul  is  known  to  have  written  sixteen  at  least,  viz. : 
the  fourteen  now  amongst  the  apostolic  writings,  one  to  the  Lao- 
diceans  recorded  by  himself  and  enjoined  by  him  to  be  read  by 
the  Colossians,  and  one  to  the  Corinthians,  prior  to  either  of 
these  on  the  record,  and  referred  to  by  himself  in  the  ist  epistle 
to  the  Corinthians,  5th  chapter.  There  were,  therefore,  sixteen, 
at  least,  written  by  St.  Paul,  but  how  many  before  Peter  wrote 
his  2d  epistle?  Certainly  not  all;  for  St.  Paul  (2d  epistle  Timo- 
thy) wrote  that  epistle  immediately  before  his  death,  for  he  says 
therein,  ''''the  time  of  my  dissolution  is  at  hand.^^  It  is  then  morally 
certain  that  St.  Peter  meant  by  the  word  "all"  only  these  epistles 
that  had  been  written  previously  to  his  2d  epistle,  and  as  it  is 
conclusive  that  not  all  Paul's  epistles  had  been  written  then,  who 
will  dare  to  say  how  many  Peter  had  known  of.  In  this  we 
must  not  rely  on  guessing,  because  it  is  a  question  of  faith,  and 
faith  necessarily  excludes,  or  should  exclude  all  doubt.  Besides, 
the  language  of  Peter  is  extremely  indefinite,  and  as  he  does  not 
name  any  one,  what  are  we  to  do?  The  expression  "all"  may 
mean  eight,  ten,  or  twelve,  and  to  be  accurate,  it  may  mean  only 
three,  and  on  this  number  alone  could  we  rely  with  any  degree 
of  safety.  But  then  we  are  equally  at  a  loss  to  know  which 
three  he  could  refer  to;  perhaps  amongst  that  number,  and  very 
probably,  that  one  to  the  Corinthians  that  has  been  lost,  because 
it  was  written  at  a  very  early  date,  and  probably,  too,  that  to  the 
Laodiceans,  which  was  written,  necessarily,  before  that  to  the 
Colossians,  and  neither  of  which  is  on  the  record,  and  on  this 
supposition,  who  will  dare  to  select  from  the  remainder,  the  one 
that  is  inspired?  Who  will  dare  to  make  an  act  of  faith  on  the 
inspiration  of  that  particular  one  ?  Which  is  it  ?  Or  if  there 
happen  to  be  two  or  three,  which  of  them  ?  Certainly  not  the 
one  to  the  Hebrews,  which  was  not  received  as  canonical  until 
the  beginning  of  the  fifth  century,  and  which  Dr.  Martin  Lather, 


108 


THE    KEY  TO  TRUE   CHRISTIANITY. 


in  the  exercise  of  his  infallibility,  never  recognized  as  canonical. 
This  is  what  is  gained  practically  by  seizing  on  the  words  of  St. 
Peter  to  prove  the  inspiration  of  St.  Paul's  epistles,  granting  them 
all  that  we  can  reasonably  grant  in  order  to  secure  somethings 
with  certainty^  we  may  conclude  that  one  epistle  is  inspired,  but 
who  will  dare  to- lay  his  finger  on  it  and  say  with  St.  Paul,  "I 
know  and  am  certain"  and  prepared  to  make  an  act  of  faith  on 
the  inspiration  of  this  particular  epistle,  with  infallible  certainty  ? 
And  this  is  the  sum  total  of  three  months'  toil  to  prove  the  in- 
spiration of  the  scriptures,  viz  :  the  impossibility  of  placing  our 
finger  on  one  syllable  that  is  inspired^  with  any  degree  of  moral 
certainty  ! 

In  the  beginning  of  to-day's  letter  the  gentleman  uses  the  fol- 
lowing language  rather  equivocally  :  "  For  many  weeks  somebody 
saw  that  your  cause  and  yourself  were  suffering  in  this  contro- 
versy." The  key  to  these  words  is,  I  believe,  to  be  found  in 
the  following,  towards  the  end  of  to-day's  letter.  "  Thus  you 
state  your  argument.  I  say  pw,  but  this  letter  does  not  read  like 
yours,"  &c.  The  insinuation  contained  in  these  two  quotations 
is  palpable.  I  feel  it  necessary,  in  reply,  to  assert  my  manhood, 
and  in  the  most  emphatic  and  formal  manner,  declare  that  the 
human  being  does  not  live  who  furnished  me  the  slightest  aid, 
mentally  or  mechanically,  to  write  or  compose  one  syllable  of  any 
one  of  the  letters  addressed  by  me  to  the  reverend  gentleman.  The 
letters  were  composed  by  me,  written  by  my  own  hand  (every 
syllable),  with  all  their  faults  and  merits.  I  therefore  beg  leave 
to  indignantly  repel  the  imputation.  Can  the  reverend  gentleman 
truthfully  make  that  declaration  his  own?     I  defv  him  to  do  so. 

A  remark  made  by  Dr.  Blackwell  in  his  second  last  letter,  I 
feel  bound.  In  justice  to  myself,  to  notice.  He  would  have  me 
say  that  the  apostolic  writings  were  only  human  documents  until 
the  church  had,  by  placing  her  seal  on  them,  declared  them  in- 
spired. It  Is  my  duty  to  say,  that  no  language  of  mine  could  be 
honestly  Interpreted  thus.  In  my  letter  of  July  7th  I  proceeded 
to  give  an  outline  of  my  faith,  and  in  so  doing  I  merely  pre- 
scinded or  abstracted  from  the  acknowledged  Divine  character 
of  the  work,  which  was  always  my  belief,  because  the  authority 
of  the  church  moved  me  thereto,  as  it  did  the  great  Augustine, 
and  In  the   exposition  of  the  ana)v<?is  of  mv  faith,  accepting  the 


THE    KEY  TO   TKUE   CHKISTIANITY.  JQg 

writings  as  human  works,  I  concluded  their  Divine  origin  from 
the  authority  of  the  church  (and  the  result  of  this  discussion 
forces  the  conviction  on  us  that,  only  thus^  can  any  one  be  sure 
of  their  inspiration).  There  is  no  scholar  who  does  not  recog- 
nize and  practice  the  logical  process  of  abstraction  or  precision, 
which  the  reverend  gentleman  adopted,  like  myself,  by  availing 
himself  of  the  genuineness,  authenticity  and  veracity  of  those 
works  as  human  productions^  and  thence  seeking  to  prove  their 
Divine  character  from  their  own  testimony — in  the  doing  of  which 
he  has  failed  so  completely  and  disastrously  •,  and  the  result  pre- 
dicted by  me  in  the  beginning  of  the  discussion  is  now  patent  to 
the  world  and  verified  to  the  letter,  viz.  :  The  reverend  gentle- 
tleman  cannot  to-day  make  an  act  of  faith,  rationally^  in  the  in- 
spiration of  a  single  syllable  of  the  apostolic  writings,  except  in 
the  messages  sent  by  God  through  St.  John  to  the  bishops  of  the 
seven  churches  ;  and,  as  declared  in  my  terms  of  debate,  he  is 
ever  debarred  from  quoting  the  apostolic  writings  as  inspired 
works  as  long  as  he  adheres  to  the  biblical  platform  ;  and  as  an 
inevitable  result,  the  foundation  being  unable  to  furnish  the  slight- 
est evidence  of  a  supernatural  character,  the  superstructure — that 
is,  the  religion  founded  on  such  a  basis — is  necessarily  equally 
destitute  of  the  same.  ^^ Nemo  dat  quod  non  habet''  is  a  logical 
maxim  literally  applicable  here. 

The  readers  of  the  Virginian  not  acquainted  with  the  rules  con- 
trolling polemics  may  have  been  surprised  that  I  should  have 
permitted  my  reverend  opponent  to  write  with  impunity,  and  as 
he  thought  proper,  in  reference  to  so  many  supposed  abuses  and 
errors  of  the  catholic  church.  This  I  was  obliged  to  do,  by  my 
scrupulous  respect  for  the  universally  admitted  laws  of  discussion. 
On  the  other  hand,  my  reverend  opponent  recognizing,  almost 
at  the  beginning,  the  unenviable  situation  in  which  his  principles 
involved  him,  determined  to  fling  off  all  the  restraints  which 
govern  controversialists,  and  commenced  the  discussion  by  a 
fierce  onslaught  on  the  catholic  church,  which  he  has  invariably 
maintained  ever  since,  to  the  exclusion  of  the  matter  alone  legiti- 
mate, two  instances  alone  excepted,  so  that  every  letter  of  his, 
from  first  to  last,  the  above  exceptions  admitted,  would  have 
been  thrown  out  as  irrelevant,  and  ignored  by  all  competent 
judges  of  controversy. 


220  THE    KEY  TO    TRUE    CHRISTIANITY. 

Had  I  allowed  myself  to  be  drawn  in  defence  of  my  church 
(although  ever  so  much  disposed  to  tear  off  the  hideous  mask 
with  which  the  reverend  gentleman  sought,  by  misrepresentation, 
to  soil  the  fair  face  of  Christ's  beloved  spouse,  who  is,  as  St. 
Paul  says,  "  without  spot  or  wrinkle,")  to  refute  these  calumnies, 
I  would  be  guilty  of  a  two-fold  violation  of  the  laws  of  polemics, 
viz.  :  the  direct  introduction  of  irrelevant  matter  foreign  to  the 
question  at  issue,  and  the  sanctioning  of  such  introduction  on  the 
part  of  my  reverend  opponent ;  hence  I  deemed  it  better  that 
Christ's  spouse  should  suffer  a  little  from  the  almost  impotent 
rage  of  her  enemy  than  that  I  should  swerve  for  a  moment 
from  the  recognized  laws  of  discussion.  Of  one  thing,  however, 
my  readers  may  rest  assured,  that  should  ever  the  occasion  for 
directly  defending  the  doctrines  of  the  catholic  church  present 
itself,  the  pen  that  so  effectively  demolished  the  foundation  of 
the  fabric  whereon  the  biblical  system  rests,  and  so  faithfully  ex- 
posed the  utter  destitution  of  any  claim  to  a  supernatural  religion, 
will  be  equally  prompt  in  vindicating  as  effectively  the  beloved 
spouse  of  Jesus  Christ  and  her  unerring  teachings. 

Before  I  take  a  final  leave  of  the  public,  I  would  request  to  be 
allowed  to  say  a  word  in  defence  of  Dr.  Blackwell,  viz.  :  What 
he  had  committed  himself  to  accomplish  has  never  yet  been 
effected  by  any  protestant  controversialist.  Perhaps  the  reverend 
gentleman  was  not  aware  of  that.  For  three  hundred  years  all 
such  controversialists  have  sustained  themselves  by  the  cuttle- 
fish tactics  so  well  and  industriously  employed  by  the  reverend 
doctor,  so  that  the  gentleman  cannot  conscientiously  claim  a 
patent  right  for  the  discovery ;  but,  on  the  whole,  he  has  done  as 
well  as  any  one  else  could  have  done  whose  conscience  and  want 
of  self-respect  would  not  interfere  with  the  adoption  of  such  a 
course. 

It  is  true  I  found  it  necessary  to  call  things  by  their  proper 
names;  but  if,  during  this  discussion,  I  have  unnecessarily  wounded 
the  sensibihties  of  the  reverend  gentleman  by  any  uncalled-for 
expression,  I  regret  doing  so  from  my  heart,  and  now  declare 
that  I  entertain  for  him  to-day  no  other  feelings  than  those  of 
unfeigned  charity  and  good-will. 

Respectfully,  yours, 

M.  O'KEEFE. 


THE   KEY  TO  TRUE   CHRISTIANITY.  JJ"!^ 

NORFOLK,  OCT.  31,  1873. 
PROPRIETORS  VIRGINIAN. 

Gentlemen  :  When  I  took  up  your  paper  this  morning  and 
glanced  at  the  formidable  document  addressed  to  my  humble  self, 
I  felt  assured  that  the  reverend  gentleman  had  made  an  expiring 
effort  to  maintain  the  only  remnant  left  (St.  Peter's  second  epis- 
tle In  favor  of  the  inspiration  of  St.  Paul's  epistles)  of  the  proofs 
presented  by  him  to  uphold  the  Inspiration  of  the  new  testament. 
But  after  having  waded  through  the  seven  columns  I  failed  utterly 
to  find  one  word  for  the  Inspiration  of  St.  Paul — the  only  text  left 
for  which  a  stand  might  have  been  made  ;  but,  alas  !  that,  too, 
had  been  abandoned  In  despair. 

In  this  letter  we  are  treated,  ^^  usque  ad  nauseam^''  to  prayers  to 
the  Virgin,  genuflections,  with  the  thousand  and  one  stereotyped 
slanders  that  constantly  characterize  all  mediocre  effusions  of 
tongue  and  pen  on  the  part  of  "  our  evangelical  brethren."  An 
intelligent  public  will  not  fail  to  comprehend  now  the  almost 
frantic  efforts  I  constantly  made  during  the  discussion  to  confine 
my  reverend  opponent  to  the  only  point  legitimately  under  discus- 
sion, viz.,  the  proofs  for  the  inspiration  of  the  bible,  from  the 
protestant  standpoint;  and  when  despairing  of  success  I  declined 
to  address  him  directly  hereafter,  I  had  hoped  that  his  utter  failure 
to  comply  with  the  terms  of  the  compact,  to  which  the  attention 
of  the  public  would  be  naturally  directed  by  this  flank  movement, 
would.  If  possible,  stimulate  him  to  make  one  more  effort  to 
maintain  the  biblical  system  of  which  he  had  constituted  himself, 
gratuitously,  the  champion  ;  but,  alas  !  all  my  efforts  have  been 
in  vain.  Not  one  word  to-day  in  defence  of  his  position,  vyhilst 
he  takes  his  cong^. 

I  now  fearlessly  declare  that  a  more  disastrous  defeat  never 
before  marked  the  pages  of  controversy  than  this  one.  A  con- 
tract— "  signed,  sealed  and  delivered" — had  been  entered  Into  by 
the  reverend  gentleman  and  myself.  In  the  presence  of  thousands, 
whereby  he  was  solemnly  pledged  to  furnish  adequate  proofs  of 
the  inspiration  of  the  scriptures  on  protestant  principles.  This^ 
and  this  alone^  was  his  legitimate  task.  To-day  he  retires  from  the 
discussion  without  having  advanced  one  step  in  proving  one  syl- 
lable inspired.     This  is  an  undeniable  truth,  and  well  may  his  co- 


2-|^2  '  THE    KEY    TO    TRUE    CHRISTIANITY. 

believers  feel  mortified  that  he  should  have  been  the  cause  of 
making  such  an  expose  before  the  world  of  the  utter  groundless- 
ness of  their  system  of  belief. 

How  can  the  reverend  gentleman  henceforth  stand  in  a  pulpit, 
and,  opening  that  book,  call  it,  or  any  portion  of  it,  with  truth^ 
the  "  Word  of  God  ?'*  How  could  he,  after  this,  present  as 
proofs  of  the  inspiration  of  apostolic  writings  those  texts  upon 
which  he  relied  to  convince  students  and  skeptics,  and  which 
he  so  long  sacredly  withheld  from  the  profane  gaze  of  the  mul- 
titude and  myself,  when  to-day's  letter  does  not  contain  one  word 
to  rescue  their  disjecta  membra  from  the  mangling  they  received 
at  my  hands  in  my  last  letters  ?  Alas  !  for  the  biblical  system  I 
Not  one  word  of  its  tattered  fragments  worth  striking  one  blow 
for  in  to-day's  letter.  That  production  is  a  formal  abandonment 
of  the  effort  to  uphold  the  biblical  system  as  a  divine  arrange- 
ment. In  a  word,  nearly  four  months  of  toil  and  collecting  ma- 
terial from  all  directions,  have  ended  in  emphatically  convincing 
the  biblical  world  that  their  religion  is  truly  and  really  a  "  base- 
less fabric,"  without  a  word  from  the  Holy  Spirit  to  maintain  its 
claims.  Regarding  the  bogus  catholic  I  have  nothing  to  retract. 
I  have  a  copy  of  that  letter  In  my  possession,  and  once  more 
reiterate  that  there  is  not  a  word  therein  that,  with  the  informa- 
tion already  possessed  by  the  reverend  gentleman,  would  warrant 
his  having  addressed  him  as  a  Catholic.  The  gentleman  asks : 
"  Would  he  disgrace  your  church  by  membership  ?  Suppose  he 
is  an  infidel,  you  have  had  popes  who  were  Infidels.  Pope  John 
was  deposed  by  a  general  council  on  the  charge  of  infidelity. 
My  bible,  which  is  my  rule  of  faith,  does  not  allow  me  to  falsify." 
I  reply,  as  regards  the  writer  of  this  anonymous  letter :  "  No 
matter  how  great  the  sinner,  he  is  ever  welcome  to  the  bosom  of 
the  church.  It  was  for  this  she  was  instituted  by  her  divine 
Founder ;  but  faith  is  absolutely  necessary  as  a  preliminary  to 
membership."  As  regards  the  statement  that  Pope  John  was 
deposed  by  a  general  council  of  the  church,  I  have  only  to  say 
that  although  the  gentleman's  bible  does  not  permit  him  to  falsify, 
he  has  done  so  by  again  calling  a  general  council  that  which  was 
never  before  called  so.  How  does  that  suit  ?  How  true  is  it 
that  "a  little  learning  is  a  dangerous  thing!"  Mais  revenons  a  nos 
mouions. 


THE  KEY  TO  TRUE  CHEISTIANITY.  -^-^^ 

In  the  gentleman's  second  last  letter  he  introduces  the  vicious 
circle  once  more.     This  is  very  natural.      My  success  in  destroy- 
ing every  vestige  of  a   supernatural  origin  for  the  religion  vi^hich 
he  represents  has  been   so  palpable  and   evident,  despite  every 
effort  of  his  to  maintain  it,  that  in  his  despair  he,  ex  toto  corde, 
makes  an  expiring  effort  to  avenge  himself  by  seeking  to  under- 
mine the  only  foundation  existing  of  a  supernatural  religion.      But 
I  sincerely  hope  that  it  was  not  the  mind  that  presided  ov^r  the 
philosophical  department  of  the  reverend  gentleman's  letters  that 
furnished  the  attempt  at  reasoning  found  towards  the  close  of 
that  letter ;  if  so,  let  me  assure  him  that  whatever  respect  I  had 
heretofore  entertained  for  him  as  a  philosopher  has  vanished. 
He  says  :   "  In  your  argument  you  start  with   these  writers  as 
mere  truthful  historians.     I  could  not  swear  to  the  exact  words  of 
any  statement  I  heard  five  years  ago."     Mere  truthful !     Gram- 
matically and  logically  we  have  a  bonne  houche.      But  as  the  gen- 
tleman's utter  contempt  for  the  rules  of  grammar  did  not  permit 
him  to  accept  the  proffer  of  a  grammar  on  a  former  occasion,  I 
feel  under  no  other  obllg'ation  than  to  call  attention  merely  to  the 
"  error,  whilst  I  feel  it  my  duty  to  notice  specially  his  wallowing 
in  the  mire  whilst  seeking  to  destroy  one  of  the  chief  motives  of 
certitude.      Merely  truthful  historians,  forsooth !     What   more 
than  truthful  could  you  have  them  ?     Were  they  inspired,  could 
they  be  more  than  truthful  ?     What  more  is  required  in  order  to 
secure   certitude  ?     If  Matthew  be  truthful,  can  God  himself 
make   him  more  so  ?     Is  one  truth  intrinsically  greater  or  less 
than  another  ?     Will  the  gentleman  recall  one  of  his  early  letters 
to  me,  wherein,  driven  to  the  wall  for  proofs  for  inspiration  of 
the  scriptures,  he  asserted  that  inspiration  was  of  no  further  use 
than  to  secure  truth  ?  and   did   he   not  enter  on  this  discussion 
with  the  genuineness,  authenticity  and  truthfulness  of  the  apos- 
tolic writings  as  a  basis  ?     What  will  not  the  gentleman  ignore 
when  it  suits  his  purpose  ?      But  let  me  use  the  argumentum  ad 
hominem  on  the  gentleman.      So  St.  Matthew  could  not  remem- 
ber sixty-six  words  spoken  to  himself  and  a  ftw  others  because 
the  gentleman  would  not  swear  to  what  he  had  heard  five  years 
ago.     But  I  will  condemn  the  gentleman  from  his  own  lips,  by 
calling  his  attention  to  his  own  words  in  the  same  letter.     I 
asked  him  if  it  were  necessary  that  he  be  inspired  in  order  to 

8 


114 


THE  KEY   TO  TRUE  CHRISTIANITY. 


write  out  for  a  child,  from  memory,  the  ten  commandments  ? 
He  replied,  '*■  Oh,  no."  Now  over  thirty  years  have  elapsed 
since  the  gentleman  first  learned  these  commandments,  and  he 
declares  that  he  can  write  them  from  memory.  The  command- 
ments contain  three  hundred  and  sixty-eight  words,  and  after 
thirty  years  or  more  he  can  write  them,  while  St.  Matthew 
could  not  retain,  according  to  the  gentleman,  for  twenty  years, 
sixty-six  words  spoken  to  him  by  Jesus  Christ  himself,  the  said 
words  containing  his  commission  to  teach  the  world,  and  which 
were  more  indelibly  impressed  on  his  memory  than  any  other 
words  ever  spoken  by  his  Master ;  whilst  during  these  twenty 
years  they  must  have  been  recalled  fifty  times  to  the  once  that 
the  commandments  were  by  the  reverend  gentleman,  for  they 
were  his  credentials  to  preach  the  gospel.  Alas  !  of  what  shifts 
and  contradictions  is  not  error  capable,  when  to  subserve  its  ends 
it  will  rob  the  apostles  of  their  veracity — when  it  will  assert 
what  robs  philosophy  of  one  of  its  most  precious  gems,  viz.,  the 
infallible  certitude  that  the  whole  world  concedes  to  historical 
witnesses,  coeval  and  cotemporary  with  the  facts  asserted,  and 
surrounded  with  all  the  conditions  required  to  insure  certitude — 
for  such  was  the  testimony  furnished  by  Matthew  !  And  it  may 
be  asked  why  this  desperate  attempt  to  destroy  the  very  founda- 
tion of  philosophy.  Why  expose  himself  to  thus  contradict  him- 
self.? and  why  seek  to  undermine  the  veracity  of  the  apostles, 
thus  destroying  the  very  basis  on  which  this  discussion  rested  .? 
The  answer  is  obvious.  The  biblical  system  stands  before  the 
world  to-day  a  manifest  fraud,  from  its  inability  to  cover  its  na- 
kedness with  a  single  patch  of  Divine  inspiration ;  or  rather,  the 
crow  is  stripped  of  his  borrowed  plumage,  and  the  advocates  of 
this  system,  in  their  mortification  and  impotent  rage,  seek  to 
engulph  in  destruction  the  sole  source  left,  whereby  the  inspira- 
tion of  the  sacred  records  can  be  proved.  The  failure  to  prove 
St.  Matthew  inspired  was  sufficiently  mortifying,  but  the  effort 
to  destroy  his  veracity,  admitted  by  the  world,  out-Herods  Herod. 
The  motive  for  this  self-contradictory,  unphilosophical,  calum- 
nious, un-christian  attack  on  the  veracity  of  the  apostle  Matthew, 
for  the  purpose  of  dragging  the  catholic  church  into  the  mire — 
in  which  I  leave  the  gentleman  wallowing — is  only  too  palpable. 
Having  dissipated  conclusively  the  delusion  which,  doubtless, 


THE    KEY  TO    TRUE   CHRISTIANITY.  H5 

pervaded  the  minds  of  many  who  heretofore  have  been  indus- 
triously impregnated  with  a  sublime  contempt  for  catholics  and 
their  belief,  without  for  a  moment  suspecting  that  they  could  not 
themselves  produce  an  iota  of  evidence  in  favor  of  the  supernatu- 
ral character  of  their  own  religion,  inasmuch  as  this  discussion 
has  proved  that  the  biblical  system  has  suffered  a  total  shipwreck, 
and  been  cast  on  the  beach  without  the  possibility  of  discovering 
a  single  supernatural  nail  to  unite  together  its  shattered  and 
storm-spent  timbers  ;  in  a  word,  having  exposed  during  the  dis- 
cussion the  inherent  vacuity  of  the  system,  and  especially  its 
utter  inability  to  make  good  the  slightest  claim  to  a  supernatural 
origin,  bereft  as  it  has  been  proven  to  be  of  the  possession  of  one 
syllable  of  Divine  revelation,  I  will  now  proceed  to  expose  some 
of  the  practical  absurdities  of  the  same  system  which  destroy  the 
foundation  of  the  supposed  work  of  God  Himself  (which  it  is  far 
from  being,  as  we  have  seen)  and  which  will  extort  from  all  ra- 
tional men  the  conviction  that  the  God  of  reason  and  truth  could 
have  no  part  in  it.  I  must  be  concise.  I  ask  was  Jesus  Christ  a 
legislator?  He  says  Himself,  "I  am  not  come  to  destroy  but 
to  fulfill  the  law."     (Matthew,  5  c.  17  v.  7  p.) 

This  being  so,  it  behooved  Him  to  adopt  the  precautions  of  all 
legislators,  to  see  that  His  laws  were  always  interpreted  according 
to  His  own  mind,  so  that  the  spirit  of  His  law  could  not  be  at 
any  time  tortured  to  signify  otherwise  than  as  He  intended.  His 
law  was  the  perfection  of  the  Divine  positive  law  promulgated  by 
God  Himself  at  the  creation,  and  as  such  should  never  be  with- 
out a  witness,  interpreter  and  judge,  to  testify  to  its  divine  exist- 
ence and  origin,  to  instruct  according  to  the  will  of  the  legislator, 
and  to  decide  without  possibility  of  erring,  all  difficulties  that 
might  arise  in  its  administration.  But  the  system  referred  to  is 
utterly  bereft  of  each  of  these  attributes  absolutely  essential  to 
all  legislation.  The  code,  in  the  first  place,  claims  to  come  from 
God  ;  this  controversy  has  definitely  destroyed  any  such  claim. 
He  neither  wrote  it,  nor  did  He  order  a  line  of  it  to  be  written, 
nor  did  they  who  wrote,  say  they  wrote  by  his  dictation — there- 
fore the  system  under  examination  has  no  witness  to  testify  to 
the  divine  origin  of  the  assumed  code  of  laws  left  by  Jesus  Christ 
as  a  legislator.  And  even  admitting  it  as  His,  we  are  inextrica- 
bly surrounded  by  difficulties  insuperable.      Where  are  the  inter- 


-j-ig  THE    KEY  TO  TRUE    CHRISTIANITY. 

preter  and  judge  ?  No  legislator  ever  yet  was  so  besotted  as  to 
make  a  law  and  not  appoint  a  judge  to  decide  what  was  his  will 
regarding  all  points  requiring  interpretation  and  decision.  To  do 
otherwise  would  be  to  ignore  the  most  practical  part  of  legisla- 
tion :  it  would  be  to  play  Hamlet  without  Hamlet.  Imagine  for 
a  moment  the  Legislature  of  Virginia  placing  the  "code"  in  the 
hands  of  the  people  without  establishing  a  judiciary  to  interpret 
and  decide  authoritatively  the  law  !  Can  any  chaos  be  conceived 
similar  to  this  ?  When  would  one  of  the  thousand  cases  that 
yearly  come  up  for  adjudication  in  her  courts  be  settled  "accord- 
ing to  law,"  if  left  to  the  decision  of  the  litigants  themselves  ? 
And  yet  this  is  what  is  forced  on  our  observation  in  the  system 
that  claims  the  right  of  private  judgment  to  interpret  authorita- 
tively the  law  of  Jesus  Christ. 

I  can  well  imagine  the  smile  that  would  light  up  the  counte- 
nance of  the  biblical  lawyer  or  judge  who  would  be  soHcited  to 
advocate  the  introduction  of  this  perfect  system  of  legislation  attri- 
buted to  the  Omniscient  God  in  place  of  the  imperfect  code  of 
Virginia  now  existing  in  our  commonwealth.  No  judge,  no  lav/- 
yer,  no  court  of  justice  hereafter  !  The  biblical  system  which 
has  for  the  past  three  hundred  years  proved  its  perfect  practica- 
bility (?)  in  deciding  so  many  questions  of  controversy,  which 
has  been  so  eminently  successful  in  convincing  pagans,  and  which 
has,  at  length,  so  happily  demonstrated  the  realization  of  the 
prayer  of  Jesus  Christ  to  His  Father  for  the  unity  of  his  children, 
viz.,  "that  they  may  be  one  as  Thou  and  I  are  one ;"  and  this 
system  is  now  to  be  substituted  for  that  "  code"  which  has  for 
so  long  a  period  ruled  the  destinies  of  the  commonwealth.  I 
can  well  portray  the  indignation,  the  horror  and  contempt  that 
would  pervade  the  mind  of  every  citizen  as  soon  as  such  a  pro- 
position was  submitted.  Nothing  but  chaos  and  confusion  would 
be  anticipated,  and  yet  the  system  proposed  as  a  substitute  pur- 
ports to  be  an  emanation  from  God.  A  book  assuming  to  con- 
tain a  Divine  code  of  laws  is  placed  in  the  hands  of  christians. 
It  has  no  authorized  exponent ;  no  judiciary  to  declare  authorita- 
tively the  Divine  will  presumed  to  be  contained  therein.  Each 
individual  is  the  rightful  exponent  of  the  laws.  Was  ever  legis- 
tor  before  so  short-sighted  as  this  one  ?  And  is  not  the  chaos 
just  now  portrayed  in  the  case  of  the  commonwealth  of  Virginia 


THE    KEY  TO  TRUE   CHRISTIANITY.  Il'l 

substituting  the  Divine  arrangement  for  the  present  one,  more 
than  realized  under  the  present  biblical  system.  Is  there  a  doc- 
trine of  Christianity  that  is  not  torn  to  shreds  ?  Is  there  a  blas- 
phemy that  ever  could  be  forged  in  the  infernal  regions  that  does 
not  find  protection  under  the  wings  of  the  system  ?  Who  can 
point  out  one  truth  of  Christianity  that  is  not  denied  by  some  of 
its  strongest  advocates  ?  I  do  not  wonder  that  moderate  and  re- 
flecting men  prefer  to  hold  aloof  from  a  recognition  of  the  Chris- 
tianity that  is  incorporated  in  such  a  system.  Can  any  impiety 
equal  this  when  reasoned  out  to  its  legitimate  consequences  ?  and 
yet  it  is  the  immediate  result  of  a  legislation  which  ignores  the 
existence  of  a  judiciary  to  pronounce  authoritatively  the  will  of 
the  legislator.  In  a  word,  no  absurdity  can  be  conceived  equal 
to  that  under  discussion,  and  I  must  confess  that  were  such  a 
system  proposed  for  my  adoption,  so  far  from  deeming  the  legis- 
lator, in  such  premises.  Omniscient,  I  should  be  disposed  to  regard 
Him  as  considerably  beneath  the  calibre  of  any  semi-civilized 
ruler,  who  should  for  the  first  time,  try  his  raw  hand  at  legislating. 
Neither  Omniscience  nor  common  sense  could  identify  itself 
with  such  a  procedure. 

Again,  the  reverend  gentleman  says  in  to-day's  letter,  "  the 
position  of  protestants  is  that  the  bible  contains  all  things  essen- 
tial to  salvation."  Let  us,  adopting  this  platform  fresh  from  the 
pen  of  the  gentleman,  investigate  it  in  its  practical  workings  in  a 
most  important  feature. 

If  there  be  any  doctrine  common  to  protestantism  (and  I^elieve 
it  is  the  only  one  on  which  its  representatives  are  of  ''  one  mind"), 
it  is  the  observance  of  the  Sunday,  and  I  aver  that  if  "the  father 
of  lies"  ever  grinned  with  a  malicious  smile  of  self-satisfaction  it 
is  over  this  gross  inconsistency  of  biblical  christians. 

The  biblical  christian  despising  the  authority  of  that  church 
which  alone  can  save  him  from  the  wrath  of  God  for  his  gross 
violation  of  His  command,  and  from  the  ridicule  of  unbelievers 
for  his  inexcusable  inconsistency,  exposes  himself  by  the  above 
"position"  irretrievably  to  both  one  and  the  other,  by  the  con- 
scious violation  of  the  most  positive  of  God's  commandments^  viz. : 
Remember  the  Sabbath  day,  to  keep  it  holy.  Now,  if  the  posi- 
tion of  protestants  be  "  that  the  bible  contains  all  things  essential 
to  salvation,"  where,  let  me  ask  them  in  sober  earnestness  will 


Jig  THE    KEY  TO   TRUE   CHRISTIANITY. 

they  find  one  word  in  the  bible  that  will  justify  their  weekly  vio- 
lation of  the  most  emphatic  of  God's  commands  ?  Is  not  that  Sab- 
bath the  last  day  of  the  week  ?  Has  not  the  Israelite,  from  time 
immemorial,  kept  that  day,  and  does  he  not  now  keep  it  ?  and 
is  he  not  consistent  in  obeying  God's  command  as  contained  in 
the  old  testament,  and  does  not  the  biblical  christian  profess  to 
worship  the  same  God  and  obey  His  commands,  and  yet  does  he 
not  keep  another  day  than  that  kept  by  the  Israelite?  What 
authorizes  this  divergence  ?  Has  Jesus  Christ  in  the  apostolic 
records  changed  the  law  ?  I  reply,  most  emphatically,  No^  and 
I  defy  any  man  living  to  show  me  in  the  new  testament^  the  first  word 
that  would  indicate  any  such  change.  On  the  contrary,  everything 
recorded  in  the  new  testament,  is  in  favor  of  the  Sabbath  (Satur- 
day). But  I  nearly  exhausted  this  subject  in  a  series  of  letters 
which  I  inserted  in  the  columns  of  the  Virginian  under  the  "  nom 
de  plume"  of  "  Light,"  last  year,  in  reply  to  some  fanatics  who 
seek  to  change  the  joyful  christian  Sunday  into,  a  long-faced 
puritan  Sabbath.  When  I  entered  on  the  discussion  with  Dr. 
Blackwell  I  declared  publicly  that  his  system  of  religion  left  him 
without  a  shred  of  rational  testimony  to  vindicate  its  supernatural 
character,  and  has  not  the  result  fully,  thoroughly  and  literally 
realized  my  vaticinations  ?  The  letter  of  this  morning  has  for- 
ever settled  the  utter  impossibility  of  maintaining  that  a  syllable 
exists  of  the  new  testament  wherein  the  biblical  christian  can 
make  a  rational  act  of  faith  in  favor  of  its  inspiration. 

I  now,  in  a  similar  manner,  publicly  declare  that  all  who  think 
with  the  reverend  gentleman  (on  the  biblical  platform),  are  living 
in  open  and  flagrant  violation  of  God's  positive  precept  and  in 
flat  contradiction  of  their  own  professed  belief  in  the  all-sufli- 
ciency  of  the  bible,  by  daring  to  alter  God's  command,  substi- 
tuting another  day  of  the  week  for  the  one  ordained  by  Him, 
which  crime  admits  of  no  palliation  ;  which  can  admit  of  no  jus- 
tification, and  which  God  visited  with  the  most  terrible  chastise- 
ments in  former  days.  The  command  "  Remember  the  Sabbath 
day,"  is  more  positive  than  any  of  the  others ;  it  remains  on  the 
record  without  change  or  modification  anywhere  to  be  found  in 
the  apostolic  writings.  Christ  said,  "  If  thou  wilt  enter  into  life 
keep  the  commandments,"  and  who  will  dare  say  that  if  the 
young  man  had  arbitrarily  kept  Sunday  instead  of  Saturday  he 


THE  KEY  TO  TRUE  CHRISTIANITY.  -t-in 

would  not  have  been  rebuked  by  Christ  ?  No  :  there  is  not  a 
hint  of  the  abrogation  of  the  day  or  its  substitution  by  another, 
to  be  found  anywhere  in  the  apostolic  record.  Hence  the  inevi- 
table subjection  of  all  such  believers  to  the  wrath  of  God  for 
every  weekly  violation  of  this  clear,  emphatic,  and  most  positive 
order  from  the  Divinity  Himself.  The  threat  is  not  mine — it  is 
that  of  God  Himself,  clearly  denounced  in  His  own  word.  Let 
the  reverend  gentleman  reconcile  the  terrible  denunciations  of 
God  for  the  violation  of  His  commands  with  the  practice  of  the 
religion  he  professes,  and  if  he  can  compromise  the  matter  with 
God,  in  the  open  violation  of  whose  law  he  spends  his  life  (on 
bible  principles,  freshly  repeated  by  him  to-day),  and  relieve  him- 
self from  the  charge  of  gross  inconsistency — direct  contradiction 
hetweeii  prificiples  and  practice^  before  God  and  mankind^  I  shall  not 
complain.  For  my  part,  I  should  renounce  Christianity,  rather 
than  spend  my  days  in  the  gross  and  constant  violation  of  the 
most  positive  and  most  emphatic  command  of  that  Being,  whom 
I  pretend  to  adore  and  obey.  In  this  anomaly  we  realize  an- 
other of  these  glaring  contradictions  that  render  the  system  that 
authorizes  it,  in  the  eyes  of  all  thinking  men,  "a  rnockery,  a 
delusion  and  a  snare.'* 

Thus  has  the  discussion  just  closed  irrefutably  proved  that  the 
religion  represented  by  the  reverend  gentleman  is  human  in  its 
origin,  because  of  its  failure  to  establish  for  itself  a  supernatural 
character;  insulting  to  the  Deity,  because  built  on  God's  broken 
promises,  and  because  it  represents  Him  as  the  most  stupid  of 
even  all  human  legislators  ;  contradictory  of  its  own  principles, 
inasmuch  as  it  professes  to  obey,  whilst  it  exults  in  the  inexcusa- 
ble violation  of  one  of  God's  most  positive  precepts  ;  and  finally, 
unauthorized  by  God,  for  it  rebelliously  seeks  to  compass  the 
destruction  of  the  church  of  Jesus  Christ, />«/ /'«  vain;  for,  despite 
the  coalition  with  the  powers  of  darkness,  the  promise  of  Christ 
will  ever  abide,  viz.  :  the  gates  of  hell  will  never  prevail  against 

her. 

Respectfully,  yours, 

M.  O'KEEFE. 


120  THE    KEY    TO    TKUE   CHRISTIANITY. 

[Norfolk  Virginian,  August  22, 1872.] 

SUNDAY  EXCURSIONS. 

Ahgust  23,  1872.' 

Mr.  Editor  : — Where  are  we  drifting  ?  Is  the  Sabbath  to  be- 
come with  us,  as  it  is  in  some  of  the  semi-infidel  communities  of 
Europe  and  South  America,  simply  a  day  of  worldly  pleasure  and 
recreation  ^  Is  no  voice  to  be  raised  from  either  the  press  or  the 
pulpit  ?  Is  no  effort  to  be  made  among  either  moral  or  religious 
people  against  the  encroachments  of  the  dread  evil  of  the  dese- 
cration of  God's  peculiar  day  .? 

In  looking  over  our  daily  papers,  we  see  excursions  advertised, 
offering  inducements  to  spend  that  day  far  from  the  sanctuary, 
and  surrounded  by  circumstances  only  calculated  to  promote  utter 
forgetfulness  of  moral  obligation  and  christian  duty. 

A  few  weeks  ago  I  noticed  that  somebody  highly  commended 
the  Vue  de  I'Eau  company  for  publicly  stating  that  Sabbath  ex- 
cursion boats  would  not  be  allowed  to  land  at  their  wharf,  and 
he  congratulated  the  community  that  there  was  one  company  of 
business  men  who  had  the  fear  of  God  before  their  eyes,  so  far, 
at  least,  as  not,  for  the  sake  of  gain,  to  be  parties  to  this  shame- 
ful mode  of  ensnaring  the  young  and  thoughtless,  and  breaking 
down  the  moral  safeguards  that  ought  to  surround  every  commu- 
nity. 

But,  alas  for  consistency  and  moral  courage  !  A  special  Sun- 
day afternoon  excursion  was. advertised  to  that  very  place  on  last 
Sabbath.  I  have  not  heard  whether  the  boat  was  permitted  to 
land  its  passengers.  Have  you .?  If  it  was  not,  of  course  all 
here  said  that  applies  to  that  particular  case  is  recalled. 

But,  sir,  in  serious  earnestness,  why  is  it  that  the  press,  which 
ought  to  conserve  the  morals  and  well-being  of  a  city,  commends 
these  things,  and  urges  people  to  patronize  them  ?  Are  we  all 
unbelievers  ?  Do  we  think  that  God  is  asleep  while  we  violate 
His  day  and  trample  upon  His  commands  ? 

I  can  hardly  think  that  the  paltry  sum  made  by  printing  the 
advertisement  is  the  inducement.  It  must  be  that  God  is  just, 
anJ  holy,  and  true  to  His  threatening^  as  well  as  His  promises. 

Again,  cannot  the  pulpit  do  a  great  deal  in  checking  this  evil .? 
It  seems  to  be  just  about  at  the  beginning  of  its  course  as  a  cus- 


THE    KEY  TO    TllUE    CKKISTIANITY.  I  01 

torn  among  us.      Now  is  the  time,  before  its  constant  repetition 
shall  familiarize  us  with  it,  to  set  ourselves  to  prevent  the  evil. 

Let  us  hope  that  those  who  have  the  eyes  and  the  ears  of  the 
people,  will  use  the  mighty  influence  thus  placed  within  their 
reach,  to  form  and  maintain  a  proper  standard  of  moral  conduct 
on  this  point.  If  we  do,  we  may  expect  the  blessing  that  "  brings 
no  sorrow  with  it."  If  not,  we  may  look  for  the  displeasure  of 
Him  who  will  not  always  clear  the  guilty. 

SABBATH. 


TWO  QUESTIONS  FOR  "SABBATH"  TO  ANSWER. 


OLD  POINT  COMFOKT,  August  26,  1872. 
EDITOR  NORFOLK  VIRGINIAN  : 

Sir  : — I  was  much  edified  by  the  display  of  zeal  on  the  part 
of  your  correspondent,  "  Sabbath,"  in  your  Saturday's  issue  ;  but 
before  I  can  acquiesce  fully  in  his  views,  I  would  respectfully  ask 
him  to  reply  to  one  or  two  questions,  which  he  can,  no  doubt, 
readily  answer,  being  "  well  up "  in  all  questions  pertaining  to 
God's  law,  as  contained  in  the  "good  book." 

1st.  Am  I  right  in  supposing  that  the  Sabbath  referred  to  in 
the  fourth  commandment  was  the  last  day  of  the  week,  and  our 
Saturday  ? 

2d.  If  so,  and  if  I  am  to  take  the  bible  for  my  rule  of  faith, 
please  let  me  know  where  I  can  find  therein,  under  the  old  or 
new  dispensation,  any  subsequent  command  from  God,  setting 
aside  the  original  positive  precept  of  "  keeping  holy  "  the  last 
day  of  the  week,  to  the  exclusion  of  every  other  day  .?    • 

Unless  these  questions  be  satisfactorily  answered,  and  a  posi- 
tive injunction  from  God  be  found  in  "  His  word  "  repealing  the 
original  command  for  keeping  Saturday,  in  clear  and  distinct  lan- 
guage, I  for  one  must  feel  that  the  Jew  alone  is  consistent  in 
keeping  the  Saturday,  which,  with  my  present  knowledge  of  the 
matter,  is  the  last  day  of  the  week,  and  not  the  first. 

A  clear  and  precise  answer  to  the  above,  will  afford  much 

LIGHT. 


122 


THE  KEY   TO  TRUE  CHRISTIANITY. 


OLD  POINT  COMFORT,  Septkmrkr  2,  1872. 

"SABTJATH"  ANSWERED.— "  'Sabbath's'  Sabbath  no  Sabbath."— "General  Ma- 
hone,  Presidents  McOready  and  Grice,  and  Millions  Vindicated." — "•" Light's' 
Coup  do  Grace." 

EDITOR  VIRGINIAN: 

Sir  : — Having  waited,  with  commendable  patience,  but  inef- 
fectually, for  a  full  week,  for  a  reply  from  "Sabbath,"  to  my  two 
simole  questions,  viz.  :  ist.  Is  not  the  Sabbath  of  the  fourth 
Commandment,  Saturday  .?  and  2d.  What  biblical  authority  exists 
for  the  change  to  Sunday  ?  I  now,  despairing  of  receiving  the 
information  sought  for  at  the  hands  of  "  Sabbath,"  feel  author- 
ized to  throw  a  little  light  on  the  above  questions,  and  at  the 
same  time  to  give  "  Sabbath  "  a  parting  salute. 

I  have  carefully  investigated  the  question  of  the  change  of  day, 
and  fail  to  find  in  sacred  scripture  the  shadow  even  of  an  author- 
ization of  the  change — not  a  word  from  the  Supreme  Being,  who 
alone,  directly,  or  through  His  authorized  organs,  possessed  the 
right  to  change  His  own  positive  command,  "  Remember  the 
Sabbath  day,  to  keep  it  holy," — Exodus,  20  c.  If  then  the  bible 
only  is  to  be  my  guide  in  the  revelations  and  teachings  of  God, 
the  inevitable  conclusion  is,  that  the  man  who  accepts  the  bible 
for  his  teacher  and  guide,  and  finds  therein  God's  command,  is 
guilty  of  a  most  flagrant  violation  of  a  most  positive  precept, 
should  he,  on  any  Sabbath  (Saturday)  of  his  life  occupy  himself 
otherwise  than  in  worshiping  God  and  sanctifying  His  day  (Sat- 
urday), and  not  all  the  special-pleading  or  hair-splitting  of  a  Phil- 
adelphia lawyer,  can  justify  his  course  to  the  contrary,  any  more 
than  he  could  seek  to  justify  a  causeless  infraction  of  any  one  of 
the  remaining  nine  ;  unless,  indeed,  the  same  voice  that  imposes 
the  obligation  cancels  it  by  a  subsequent  ordinance,  declaring,  in 
express  terms,  the  former  law  abrogated  ;  and  I  fearlessly  assert 
that  nowhere  in  the  sacred  scriptures,  can  any  such  repealing  law 
be  found.  If,  therefore,  God  has  left  man  no  other  teacher  than 
His  sacred  word,  there  is  no  one  living,  who  accepts  the  sa- 
cred scriptures  as  the  sole  guide  of  man  in  the  "ways  of  God," 
who  is  not  guilty  of  a  gross  violation  of  the  command  of  God, 
for  daring,  without  His  subsequent  order,  to  tamper  with  unholy 
hands,  His  precept,  and   substitute  another  day  for  the  Sabbath 


THE  KEY  TO  TRUE  CHRISTIANITY.  ;[23 

(ever  kept  holy  by  the  Jew),  and  this  is  the  secret  of  "  Sabbath's  " 
silence  to  my  questions. 

I  aver  that  there  is  not  a  shadow  of  excuse  for  the  palpa- 
ble violation  of  the  fourth  command  of  God,  and  with  what 
show  of  reason  can  the  bible  christian,  with  impunity,  and  with 
the  example  of  the  Jew  ever  before  his  eyes,  preserving  the  ori- 
ginal command,  zuhen  and  how  God  required  its  observance,  vio- 
late a  law  which  was  never  repealed  ?  This  is  a  difficulty  which 
the  best  biblical  scholars  have,  with  the  most  persistent  and  des- 
perate efforts,  failed  most  notably  to  solve,  holding  the  bible 
alone  to  be  their  rule  of  faith.  The  grounds  for  the  change,  fur- 
nished by  them  from  the  new  testament,  are  so  baseless  that  it 
amounts  to  a  waste  of  time,  and  a  mere  sophistry,  to  recapitulate 
them.  God  has  spoken  in  no  doubtful  language,  and  unless  he 
explicitly  revokes  his  command  (which  His  Son  did  not,  having 
come,  not  to  annul,  but  to  perfect  the  law),  I  maintain  that  those 
who  are  amenable  to  that  law  will  be  inevitably  punished  for  its 
violation,  and  God  cannot  be  reconciled  to  the  violator  by  being 
told  that  any  other  day  will  suit  as  well.  These  thoughts  have 
been  elicited  by  the  production  of  "  Sabbath,"  and  I  trust  they 
will  afford  to  "  Sabbath,"  and  all  whom  it  may  concern,  food 
for  reflection. 

And  now  a  few  words  for  "  Sabbath's  "  private  ear.  Your 
love  for  God's  word  is  such  that  you  have  dramatized  one  of  the 
Redeemer's  parables,  in  which,  with  native  modesty,  you  have 
chosen  for  your  own  part  a  prominent  role.  I  refer  to  the  parable 
of  the  two  men  who  ascended  the  temple  to  pray.  One  of  these, 
not  content  with  vaunting  his  good  works,  must  needs,  in  his 
arrogance,  condemn  the  rest  of  mankind,  without  exception — not 
even  was  the  poor  publican,  who  was  crying  to  God  for  mercy, 
overlooked. 

You,  Mr.  ^'  Sabbath,"  like  your  prototype  in  the  gospel,  are 
not  content  with  violating  the  command  of  God  every  Sab- 
bath of  your  life,  but  you  must  needs  call  down  the  reprobation 
of  the  community  upon  the  rest  of  mankind,  because  their  mode 
of  violating  the  law  does  not  correspond  with  yours,  and  with 
your  views. 

You,  first  of  all,  attack,  in  your  arrogance,  the  semi-infidel 
nations  of  Europe,  and   then,  in  your  self-sufficiency,  the  whole 


224  THE  KEY  TO  TRUE  CHRISTIANITY. 

of  South  America.  Should  there  be  any  doubt  of  the  people  re^ 
ferred  to  by  you  in  the  phrase,  "  semi-infidel  communities  of  Eu- 
rope, you  elucidate  all  ambiguity,  by  the  reference  to  South 
America.  The  people  of  that  region  are  all  Roman  catholics, 
and  it  is  your  "  Cheshire-cheese"  to  hold  them  up  when  occasion 
ofF&rs.  But  whilst  for  them  there  is  justification  in  not  keeping 
the  "  Saturday  "  holy,  inasmuch  as  their  church,  which  they  be- 
h'eve  God  Himself  commands  them  to  hear,  and  which  He  tells 
them  can  never  err,  for  the  gates  of  hell  can  never  prevail 
against  her,  and  because  she  is  to  them,  as  the  apostle  calls 
her,  "  the  pillar  and  the  ground  of  the  truth,"  requires  that 
the  first  day  of  the  week  be  kept  holy  ;  whilst  I  say  the  Roman 
catholic  can  justify  his  keeping  the  first,  and  not  the  last  day  of 
the  week,  and  is  consistent  in  hearing  the  voice  of  his  church, 
you,  Mr.  "Sabbath,"  can  ofFer  no  palliation  of  your  conduct,  in- 
asmuch as  you  recognize  no  teacher  but  your  bible,  and  in  this 
particular  your  bible  condemns  you  every  week  of  your  life. 

To  proceed ;  having  gratified  your  spleen  on  the  semi-infidel 
nations  of  Europe,  and  the  whole  of  South  America,  you  look 
round  for  "  game  "  nearer  home.  The  presidents  of  the  Atlan- 
tic, Mississippi  and  Ohio  railroad,  of  the  Old  Dominion  Com- 
pany of  the  Vue  de  I'Eau  hotel,  fall  under  the  ban  of  your  evan- 
gelical zeal,  nor  will  your  charity  permit  you  to  spare  the 
conductors  of  the  daily  press  of  this  city.  You  say,  "I  can 
hardly  think  that  the  paltry  sum,  etc.,  etc."  You  entertained  a 
slight  doubt,  etc.,  and  you  gave  them  charitably  the  benefit  of  it  (!), 
and  last  of  all,  the  Sabbath-breaking  crowd  on  that  steamer  !  they 
were  not  spared,  and  that  poor  publican  "  Light,"  was  in  that 
crowd  !  how  perfectly  realized  was  the  parable  !  What  arro- 
gance and  self-assumption  can  equal  this,  and  what  consistency, 
at  the  same  time  ?  The  man  whose  charity  forces  him  to  con- 
demn millions  of  his  fellow  men,  is  respectfully  asked  the  reason 
for  such  condemnation,  when  lo  !  he  is  silent,  and  there  is  reason 
to  fear  that  the  intrusion  of  "Light  "  has  dimmed  his  brightness, 
and  prevented  him  from  again  playing  the  role  of  the  "  christian 
gentleman  "  prefigured  by  Christ  in  the  parable. 

Thanking  you,  Mr.  Editor,  for  the  space  afforded  in  your  col- 
umns in  vindication  of  myself  with  millions  of  others,  including 
railroads,  steamships,  and  hotel   presidents,  and  their  employees, 


THE    KEY  TO    TRUE    CHEISTIANITY".  -^- 

I  conclude  with  the  immortal  words  of  our  eloquent  chief  magis- 
trate, "  Let  us  have — 

LIGHT." 


NORFOLK,  SEPT.   14,  1872. 

Sabbath's  Sabbath.— "  Christian  "  answers  "Light,"— The  grounds  on  which  the  first 
day  is  observed.— An  injunction  to  "Light." — "Open  your  New  Testament  and 
follow  me  with  a  mind  dispossessed  of  all  bias  and  prejudice." — Scriptural  quota, 
tions. — The  right  and  the  fact  of  the  change  from  the  Jewish  sabbath  to  the  Chris- 
tian Sunday.—"  Examine  them  in  a  prayerful  spirit." 

Mr.  Editor  :  The  importance  of  the  question  at  issue  between 
"  Light "  and  "Sabbath  *'  is  such  that  no  one  who  is  enlisted  un- 
der the  banners  of  the  Divine  Redeemer  can  remain  neutral 
or  indifferent  to  it.  This  must  plead  my  excuse  for  assuming 
the  defence  of  a  divine  institution,  which  is  at  once  preceptive  of 
man's  highest  and  most  essential  duty  on  earth,  and  forms,  so  to 
speak,  the  grandest  and  most  sublime  profession  of  faith  that 
Christianity  makes  in  God,  the  Saviour  and  Redeemer.  The 
standard  or  rule  of  faith  by  which  christian  doctrine  is  to  be 
judged  and  estimated  is  the  body  of  revealed  truth  contained 
within  the  pages  of  sacred  writ,  and  the  christian  church  does 
not  propose  for  belief  other  than  the  doctrines  therein  contained 
and  which  were  once  delivered  unto  the  saints,  for  to  do  so  even 
for  a  moment  or  by  way  of  hypothesis  would  be  to  assume  that 
Christ  had  neglected  His  mission  as  teacher,  and  had  given  to 
His  followers  an  insufficient  and  inadequate  rule  of  faith  and 
morals. 

Hence,  when  "  Light "  in  his  reply  to  "  Sabbath,"  after  assur- 
ing us  that  he  had  made  a  special  study  of  the  question,  declares 
that  no  authority  exists  for  the  observance  of  Sunday  as  a  day  to 
be  consecrated  to  the  exclusive  service  of  God,  he  gives  conclu- 
sive evidence  either  of  most  culpable  ignorance,  or  of  wilful 
misrepresentation  of  the  scriptural  testimonies,  and  places  himself 
thereby  in,  to  say  the  least,  a  most  doubtful  position  as  regards 
his  faith  in  the  entire  christian  economy.  History  informs  us'of 
a  like  denial  once  made  during  the  Reign  of  Terror,  when  the 
reign  of  reason  was  substituted  for  that  of  Deity  ;  then,  in  or- 
der to  blot  out  from  the  memory  of  man  all  trace  of  his  depend- 


126 


THE  KEY  TO  TRUE  CHRISTIA.NITY. 


ence  on  his  Maker,  bloodstained  and  sacrilegious  men  directed 
their  first  and  chief  efforts  to  the  extinction  of  Sunday's  observ- 
ance, hoping  that  the  introduction  of  a  new  nomenclature  for  the 
days  of  the  week,  months  and  years  would  cause  the  very  name 
of  Sunday,  or  Lord's  Day,  to  cease  to  be  remembered. 

Alas  !  that  in  our  own  day,  in  the  very  face  of  the  divine 
gospel  of  Jesus,  men  should  be  found  who  trample  under  their 
feet  all  that  is  most  holy  and  sacred,  and  are  so  blinded  in  their 
ungodliness  as  to  set  at  bold  defiance  the  positive  injunction  of 
the  Most  High,  which  was  declared  and  delivered  to  mankind 
amid  the  thunders  and  lightnings  of  Mount  Sinai. 

If  this  growing  spirit  of  impiety  and  desecration  be  not  resisted; 
if  this  torrent  be  not  stemmed,  which  is  surely  and  rapidly  rush- 
ing on  to  the  ocean  of  infidelity,  society  will  have  reason  to  fear 
a  return  of  the  chaotic  confusion  in  faith  and  morals  that  reigned 
over  the  world  in  the  ages  of  darkness  and  superstition,  and  which 
would  have  continued  to  reign  had  not  men,  bold  and  fearless, 
and  with  hearts  sincere  in  their  love  for  truth,  been  raised  up  by 
Almighty  God  to  bring  order  out  of  chaos  and  to  dispel  darkness 
from  the  eyes  of  men  by  holding  up  to  them  the  bright  torch  of 
the  gospel  of  truth. 

I  would  fain  dwell  longer  on  the  fatal  and  pernicious  conse- 
quences that  the  desecration  of  the  Lord's  Day  would  necessarily 
entail  upon  society,  but  the  space  I  already  occupy  in  your  col- 
umns, Mr.  Editor,  and  the  fear  of  trespassing  too  far  on  your 
valuable  time,  warn  me  to  give  my  immediate  attention  to  the 
ungrounded  assertion  that  "Light"  makes  so  emphatically  and 
with  such  aff'ected  accuracy  and  precision,  when  he  declares  that 
no  authority  exists  for  the  observance  of  Sunday  as  of  a  day  divinely 
established  for  the  exclusive  service  of  Almighty  God.  That 
the  subject  may  be  presented  in  the  clearest  possible  light,  I  will 
consider  under  the  heads  of  Right  and  Fact  the  main  arguments 
that  establish  the  change  from  the  Jewish  Sabbath,  or  Saturday, 
to  the  Christian  Sunday. 

J.  The  question  of  Right.  All  biblical  scholars  agree  in  ad- 
mitting that  the  divine  precept,  "  Remember  the  Sabbath  day,  to 
keep  it  holy,"  is  partly  a  ceremonial  precept  of  the  Mosaic  law, 
and  partly  a  moral  precept  of  the  law  of  nature.  Inasmuch  as  it 
points  out  one  particular  day  in  preference  to  another,  for  divine 


THE  KEY  TO  TRUE  CHRISTIANITY. 


127 


worship,  prescribes  the  manner  in  which  this  worship  is  to  be 
rendered,  and  declares  the  penalties  incurred  by  the  violators  of 
it,  it  is  a  ceremonial  precept,  and  therefore,  like  all  the  other 
ceremonial  precepts  of  the  Mosaic  dispensation,  which  were 
neither  based  on  the  nature  of  things,  nor  absolutely  required  by 
the  essential  relations  existing  between  man  and  his  Creator,  it 
was  liable  to  change,  and  it  was  foretold  that  there  was  to  be  a 
cessation  of  it,  and  therefore  it  was  to  be  expected.  Hence,  it 
was  in  this  respect  a  precept  of  mere  relative  utility — made  and 
established  by  God  for  a  particular  people,  the  Jews,  living  in  one 
small  corner  of  the  world,  or  at  least  not  so  generally  dispersed 
over  the  face  of  the  earth  as  to  render  its  observance  impossible, 
since  all  the  males  were  required  to  appear  three  times  a  year  at 
Jerusalem  and  worship  together.  Now  such  a  state  of  things 
was  never  designed  to  continue  always  ;  since,  when  the  Mes- 
siah should  come,  there  would  be  a  gathering  of  all  the  people 
unto  Him  from  the  rising  to  the  going  down  of  the  sun.  Now, 
to  such  a  dispensation,  the  ceremonial  part  of  the  precept  in 
question  could  never  suit,  and  therefore  could  not  be  intended  to 
be  continued  ;  the  people  of  all  nations  could  never  be  convened 
in  one  country,  and  worship  in  one  place,  and  sacrifice  at  one 
altar. 

There  are  reasons  why  this  precept,  in  so  far  as  it  was  cere- 
monial, should  cease,  for  like  all  the  other  precepts  of  the  cere- 
monial laws  of  the  Jews  and  the  whole  Israelitic  people,  it  was 
typical  of  the  spiritual  Israel  redeemed  by  Christ,  and  of  the 
works,  duties,  and  services  that  were  to  be  required  of  them, 
under  the  new  law  of  the  gospel.  Now  when  the  Antetype  of 
all  this  came,  the  types  must  cease  ;  when  Christ,  the  body,  the 
sum  and  the  substance,  appeared,  these  shadows  must  flee  away, 
as  darkness  vanishes  at  the  approach  of  the  king  of  day.  These 
reasons,  establishing  the  right,  or,  in  other  words,  the  possibility 
and  propriety  of  a  change  being  made  from  the  Jewish  Sabbath 
to  the  Christian  Sunday,  should  seem,  it  appears  to  me,  amply 
sufficient  to  convince  any  unprejudiced  mind  that  when  the  time 
determined  by  Christ,  "the  end  of  the  law,"  had  arrived,  an 
abrogation  of  that  part  of  the  precept  relating  to  the  time  and 
manner  of  its  observance  must  have  necessarily  been  made,  since 
it  was  no  longer  suited  to  the  state  of  things  under  the  new  dis- 


][28  '^HE   KEY    TO   TRUE   CHRISTIANITY. 

pensation,  and  belonged  to  a  time  of  types  and  figures  .that  had 
entirely  passed  away. 

The  moral  part,  or  that  part  which  was  expressive  of  God's 
eternal  law,  and  preceptive  of  the  moral  and  natural  duty  of  man 
to  render  worship  to  his  Creator,  could  not  be  abrogated  or  sub- 
jected to  any  change,  since  it  is  based  on  the  eternal  and  immu- 
table nature  of  God  Himself,  and  on  the  essential  relations  that 
exist  between  the  Creator  and  the  creature  ;  hence  in  its  moral 
part  this  precept  was  of  absolute  necessity  and  utility,  made  and 
established  by  Almighty  God,  not  for  one  people  only,  but  for 
every  people  ;  not  to  continue  for  a  time  only,  but  to  continue 
during  all  time,  until  the  religion  it  commands  us  to  practice  here 
on  earth  towards  God,  shall  be  perfected  by  our  complete  union 
with  the  object  of  our  worship,  after  the  shadow  of  this  world 
shall  have  passed  away.  This,  then,  was  the  only  part  of  the 
fourth  precept  that  passed  over  to  the  christian  church  ;  it  was, 
indeed,  the  only  part  that  existed  at  the  moment  the  old  dispensa- 
tion gave  place  to  the  new,  since  by  the  mere  fact  of  the  estab- 
lishment of  Christ's  Church,  which  was  to  realize  what  had  been 
prefigured  by  the  old  covenant,  all  the  shadows,  and  figures  and 
ceremonial  laws  that  were  typical  of  the  "good  things"  that  had 
now  come,  passed  completely  out  of  existence,  leaving  thereby 
the  new  Israel  to  enjoy  the  true  liberty  of  the  children  of  God. 
Hence  we  look  in  vain,  from  the  beginning  of  Matthew  to  the 
end  of  the  book  of  Revelations,  for  the  slightest  allusion  or  hint 
to  the  Jewish  Sabbath,  as  the  day  on  which  the  followers  of 
Christ  were  to  assemble  for  the  purpose  of  rendering  to  Almighty 
God  the  worship  that  the  moral  part  of  the  fourth  precept  com- 
manded, whilst  on  the  other  hand,  it  appears  plainly,  from  several 
passages,  that  the  apostles  and  disciples  assembled  together  with 
the  first  christians,  on  the  first  day  of  the  week,  or  the  Lord's 
day,  for  the  purpose  of  divine  worship. 

I  will  now  proceed  to  consider  the  arguments  of  fact  which  I 
promised  to  adduce  under  the  second  head,  and  I  doubt  not  but 
that  they  will  be  sufficient  to  carry  full  conviction  to  the  mind 
of  "  Light,"  if  he  will  open  his  new  testament  and  follow  me, 
with  a  mind  dispossessed  of  all  bias  and  prejudice.  It  will  be 
well  to  advert  to  that  law  of  evidence,  that  the  testimony  for  a 
fact  is  always  best  and  strongest,  according  as  the  character  of  the 


THE    KEY  TO    TKUE    CHKISTIANITY.  -j^Og 

witnesses  is  above  suspicion.  Now  the  witnesses  whom  we  adduce 
are  the  apostles  of  Christ,  men  inspired  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  who 
wrote  and  taught  and  preached  agreeably  to  the  commandments 
of  the  Lord.  (Matt.  28  c.  20  v  ;  i  Cor.  14  c.  37  v.)  Their 
practice,  therefore,  and  example,  carry  with  them  the  force  and 
obligation  of  a  precept.  When,  therefore,  we  discover  that  they 
were  not  only  silent  concerning  the  Sabbath  of  the  Jews,  but  that 
they  speak  of  a  day  other  than  that  on  which,  according  to  the 
Jewish  law,  worship  was  to  be  rendered  to  Almighty  God,  we 
must  conclude  that  this  other  day  was  substituted,  either  by  the 
Lord  Jesus  Himself,  or  by  his  apostles.  In  virtue  of  the  authority 
divinely  conferred  on  them  for  that  purpose.  It  Is  not  necessary 
that  we  should  find  In  the  scriptures  of  the  new  testament  writ- 
ten precept,  as  "Remember  the  Sunday  (or  Lord's  day)  to  keep 
it  holy."  The  existence  of  such  a  precept  is  as  plainly  declared 
to  us  by  the  example  of  the  apostles,  as  If  It  had  been  transmitted 
to  us  written  or  engraved  by  their  own  hands  on  tablets  of  stone. 
This  silence  of  the  apostles  in  regard  to  the  Jewish  Sabbath  can 
only  be  explained  by  assuming  that  the  day  was  abrogated  by 
the  establishment  of  Christianity  ;  whilst,  on  the  other  hand,  the 
assembling  of  the  christians  on  the  first  day  of  the  week  to  break 
bread  and  to  hear  the  preaching  of  the  word  can  only  be  ex- 
plained by  the  fact  that  they  were  Instructed  by  the  apostles  to 
believe  that  this  was  the  day  appointed  by  Christ  Himself  for 
divine  worship,  or  by  those  who  had  been  divinely  authorized  to 
do  so. 

It  is,  then,  on  these  grounds  that  we  observe  the  first  day  of 
the  week  as  a  day  set  apart  by  Christ,  or  by  the  apostles  In  con- 
formity with  the  instructions  they  received  from  Christ,  as  a  day 
that  Is  to  be  exclusively  devoted  to  the  service  of  the  Lord,  and 
as  commemorative,  at  the  same  time,  of  the  grand  mysteries  and 
events  in  the  life  of  Christ  that  transpired  on  this  day,  and  which 
form  the  groundwork  and  foundation  of  the  whole  christian  reli- 
gion. 

In  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  11  c.  I  v.,  it  is  said:  "When 
the  day  of  Pentecost  was  fully  come,  they  were  all  with  one 
accord  in  one  place,"  and  this  day  was  honored  with  the  effusion 
of  the  spirit  and  by  preaching  the  gospel  to  men  of  all  nations. 
It  was  on  the  first  day  of  the  week  that  the  disciples  at  Troas 


;J3Q  THE    KEY  TO   TRUE   CHRISTIANITY. 

met  together  to  break  bread,  when  Paul  preached  to  them.  (Acts 
20  c.  7  V.)  Now,  though  he  had  been  there  seven  days  before, 
yet  it  does  not  appear  that  he  and  they  assembled  on  the  Sabbath 
of  the  Jews,  but  only  on  the  first,  and  that  for  religious  worship; 
he  to  break  bread  to  celebrate  the  supper  of  the  Lord,  and  they 
to  hear  him  preach. 

The  apostle  Paul  gave  orders  to  the  church  at  Corinth  to 
make  a  collection  for  the  poor  on  the  first  day  of  the  week, 
when  they  met  together  (i  Cor.  i6  c.  i,  2  v.),  which  shows  that 
it  was  usual  to  meet  on  that  day  ;  nay,  it  implies  an  order  to 
meet  on  that  day. 

John  speaks  of  the  Lord's  Day,  as  a  name  well  known — so 
called  because  Christ  rose  from  the  dead  on  that  day,  in  com- 
memoration of  which  it  was  kept,  and  in  which  his  gospel  was 
preached  and  ordinances  administered  ;  for  it  was  now  more  than 
sixty  years  from  the  resurrection  of  Christ  to  John's  being  in 
exile  in  the  island  of  Patmos,  where  he  wrote  his  revelations. 

Thus  have  I  endeavored  to  sum  up  the  principal  arguments 
that  establish  the  right  and  the  fact  of  the  change  from  the  Jew- 
ish Sabbath  to  the  Christian  Sunday.  I  submit  them  to  the  con- 
sideration of  "  Light,"  with  a  well-grounded  confidence  that,  if 
he  examine  them  in  a  prayerful  spirit  and  with  an  humble  reli- 
ance on  the  divine  Author  and  Source  of  all  light  and  understand- 
ing, the  false  and  delusive  light  of  proud  reason  will  give  place 
to  the  mild  and  enlightening  rays  of  the  divine  gospel  of  truth. 

CHRISTIAN. 


OLD  POINT  COMFORT,  SEPT.  18,  1872. 

Sabbath's  Sabbath— " Light's"  reply  to  "Christian"— "Christian"  critically  castl- 
gated— A  New  Formula  of  Faith  for  "Christian,"  "Sabbath,"  &  Co. 

Editor  Norfolk  Virginian:  In  self-vindication  I  must 
again  trespass  on  your  columns. 

Your  correspondent  "  Christian"  is  very  much  exercised  be- 
cause of  my  assertion  of  the  untenableness  of  the  "  biblical" 
position  as  regards  the  change  from  Saturday  to  Sunday,  and  I 
am  sure  the  community  will  thank  me  for  giving  "  Christian"  an 


THE  KEY  TO  TRUE  CHRISTIANITY.  1  Qi 

opportunity  of  donning  his  armor  and  making  so  graceful  a  fight 
in  the  "good  cause." 

"  Christian's"  style  and  rhetoric  evince  a  highly  cultivated  in- 
tellect and  imagination,  which  almost  induces  me  to  forgive  him 
the  discourteous  allegations  of  "  most  culpable  ignorance  or  of 
wilful  misrepresentation,"  relative  to  myself.  Enough  for  my- 
self— now  for  my  cause. 

Before  I  proceed  to  reply  to  "  Christian,"  I  wish  that  my  po- 
sition be  distinctly  understood. 

In  rebuking  the  fanaticism  of  "  Sabbath,"  I  submitted  that  no 
christian  taking  the  bible  for  his  sole  rule  of  faith  can  justify  the 
ever-recurring  violation  of  God's  command  :  "  Remember  the 
Sabbath  day  to  keep  it  holy,"  Exodus,  20  c.  This  is  my  posi- 
tion, and  the  attempted  vindication  of  the  substitution  on  the 
part  of  "  Christian"  has  ended,  as  I  then  averred,  in  a  display  of 
"sophistry  and  loss  of  time." 

"  Christian"  treats  us  to  a  very  plausible  dissertation  on  the 
distinction  made  by  biblical  scholars  between  the  natural  and 
ceremonial  phases  of  the  law  of  God,  but  cui  bono  !  What  will 
it  avail  me  before  the  judgment  seat  of  God  to  appeal  to  biblical 
scholars  for  what  the  most  ordinary  intellect  can  at  once  perceive 
to  be  the  law  laid  diovjn  for  all^  without  reservation  of  t'lme^  place 
or  person^  which  law  stands,  as  I  shall  abundantly  show,  uncan- 
celled, unrevoked,  to  this  day  ? 

Where,  let  me  ask,  has  God  made  any  such  distinction  as 
this  ?  I  defy  "  Christian"  to  place  his  finger  on  it  in  the  sacred 
record.  The  distinction  is  evidently  gotten  up  to  cover  a  weak 
point,  and  herein  lies  the  sophistry.  He  again  refers  to  the  im- 
possibility of  keeping  the  command,  because  of  the  wide-spread 
character  of  the  christian  dispensation  as  contrasted  with  the 
limited  sphere  wherein  Judaism  moved.  As  facts  supplant  all 
arguments,  I  beg  leave  to  present  the  following:  ist.  The  Jew 
has,  no  matter  where  sojourning^  for  the  past  four  thousand  years 
kept  the  fourth  command  ;  and  2d.  It  is  equally  a  fact  that  the 
christian  has  been  keeping  the  first  day  of  the  week  for  nearly  nine- 
teen centuries,  and  in  the  face  of  these  two  facts  what  becomes 
of  the  impossibility  of  keeping  the  Sabbath  referred  to  by  "  Chris- 
tian." Another  fact  is  that  "Christian's"  clear  head  is  some- 
what "  mixed"  on  this  portion  of  his  theme.     "  Jliquando  dormi- 


232  '^^^    ^^^  "^^  TRUE    CHRISTIANITY. 

tat  bonus  Homerus,'*  and  well  it  may  be,  for  he  has  assumed  a 
Herculean  task,  impossible  to  be  achieved. 

Having  disposed  of  the  captious  distinction  drawn  by  "  Chris- 
tian," and  of  his  absurd  impossibility  of  keeping  the  Sabbath  day 
by  christians,  I  now  hasten  to  what  "  Christian"  calls  his  argu- 
ment of  "  Fact.''  With  your  permission,  Mr.  Editor,  I  will 
address  myself  to  "  Christian." 

You,  at  length,  and  apparently  unwillingly,  approach  what 
you  call  the  "  Facts,"  which  are  to  be  found  in  the  new  testa- 
ment, as  favoring  your  position,  viz:  ist.  The  Resurrection; 
and  2dly.  Pentecost.  As  to  the  first,  how  the  fact  of  the  resur- 
rection can  authorize  the  violation  of  a  positive  precept  of  God, 
is  all  "  Greek"  to  me.  Besides,  might  I  not  with  better  reason, 
suggest  that  the  Sabbath  be  left  as  it  was,  because  all  christians 
believe  that  their  redemption  was  effected  on  Friday  evening, 
when  Jesus  cried  out,  "It  is  finished,"  that  is,  the  redemption 
which  cost  Him  a  life  of  thirty-three  years  of  earthly  misery,  and 
by  which  man  was  restored  to  the  favor  of  God,  and  to  the  title 
of  a  heavenly  inheritance,  was  completed  on  Friday  evening — • 
the  same  evening  of  the  week  that  God  concluded  the  creation. 
Which  was  the  greater  work,  and  which  brought  greater  bless- 
ings to  man  ?  And  if  God,  after  the  creation  rested,  and  because 
He  rested,  gave  a  positive  precept  to  man  to  do  likewise  on  the 
Sabbath  (which  precept  He  never  repealed),  why  not  christian 
man,  after  the  example  of  his  Redeemer,  resting  in  the  tomb, 
and  in  accordance  with  the  command  of  God,  return  his  thanks 
on  the  Lord's  Sabbath  for  the  twofold  benefit  of  creation  and 
redemption,  effected  on  the  same  evening  of  the  week  ?  Is  there 
not  a  fitness  in  this  suggestion,  sustained  as  it  is,  by  God's  order, 
far  above  the  gratuitous  choice  of  another  day  against  His  express 
will  ? 

Again,  Pentecost  is  advanced  as  a  reason  why  Sunday  should 
be  kept ;  this  reason  on  the  lips  of  a  Roman  catholic,  is  a  forci- 
ble one,  because  he  believed  that  it  was  on  that  day  the  Holy 
Trinity  perfected  the  work  of  the  Redeemer  by  endowing  his 
church  with  infallibility — the  Holy  Ghost  having  been  sent,  he 
says,  to  teach  her  ail  truth  to  the  end  of  time;  but  that  the  bible 
christian  could  claim  the  right  to  tamper  with  God's  precept  for 
such  a  reason  as  the  above,  is  to  me  an  absurdity,  seeing  that 


THE    KEY  TO  TKUE   CHRISTIANITY 


133 


nothing  practical  accrued  to  his  system  of  Christianity  by  the  com- 
ing of  the  Holy  Ghost. 

Again,  we  are  told  that  St.  John  was  "  inspired  on  the  Lord's 
day"  (Revelations),  which  was  Sunday,  forsooth  !  Where,  in 
the  whole  range  of  sacred  scripture,  let  me  ask,  is  the  Lord's  day 
made  to  signify  Sunday  ?  I  can  present  scores  of  places  in  the 
old  testament,  and  some  in  the  new,  wherein  the  Lord's  day 
means  either  the  Sabbath,  the  day  of  God's  wrath,  or  the  final 
day,  but  nowhere  is  the  Sunday  so  called — a  baseless  assumption, 
therefore,  is  the  much-vaunted  text  from  Revelations. 

Once  more,  the  apostles  met  on  Easter  Sunday,  and  therefore 
the  Sabbath  was  abrogated  !  The  poor  coward  followers  of 
their  Master  were  found  by  Him  now  restored  to  life,  huddled 
together  in  a  room  "for  fear  of  the  Jews."  They  were  there 
for  the  reason  just  given,  hidden  away,  but  as  far  as  we  know 
no  prayer  was  said,  but  Christ,  on  that  occasion,  as  I  perceive, 
conferred  on  them  a  wonderful  power,  viz. :  that  of  forgiving  sins, 
which  millions  of  christians  believe,  but  the  bible  christian  will 
not  have  it  so.  Again,  they  happened  to  be  together  eight  days 
after,  and  Christ  appeared  for  the  purpose  of  confounding  the 
incredulity  of  Thomas,  but  not  a  single  act  of  homage  to  God 
is  reported  on  that  occasion  either.  For  the  life  of  me,  I  cannot 
comprehend  how  any  sane  man  could  furnish  such  pretexts  for 
violating  God's  command.  "Christian"  lays  great  stress  on  the 
discovery  that  the  apostles  themselves  kept  Sunday,  (Acts  20  c, 
7  V.)  Now  the  text  expressly  says  that  they  came  together  for 
the  celebration  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  but  does  that  forbid  their 
doing  so  on  any  other  day,  especially  when  I  refer  "  Christian  " 
to  the  text,  Acts  11  c,  46  v.,  in  which  it  is  expressly  stated  that 
they  did  so  every  day  ;  the  words  are  :  "  They  continued  daily 
with  one  accord  in  the  temple,  breaking  bread  from  house  to 
house.  How  does  that  suit  Mr.  "  Christian?"  What  he  claims 
for  Sunday  exclusively,  I  show  him  to  be  a  daily  practice 
from  the  word  of  God.  He  is  equally  unfortunate  in  call- 
ing St.  Paul  to  the  rescue  (i  Cor.  16  c,  i  and  2  v.)  St. 
Paul  tells  the  Corinthians,  as  he  did  the  Galatians,  that  he 
desires  to  contribute  to  the  wants  of  the  brethren  at  Jeru- 
salem, and  he  names  the  first  day  of  the  week  that  each  one 
would  set  aside  of  his  means  a  portion,  in  order  that  the  work 


•tOA  THE  KEY   TO  TEUE  CHRISTIANITY. 

of  charity  be  speedily  and  simultaneously  done.  But  in  the  name 
of  common  sense,  what,  let  me  ask,  has  this  act  of  philanthropy 
to  do  with  changing  the  Sabbath  day  ?  Where  was  the  slightest 
act  of  religion  ordered  or  hinted  on  this  occasion  ?  Not  a  word 
about  the  assembling  of  the  people,  not  even  for  the  purpose  of 
massing  together  the  alms  asked  for.  And  even  were  it  so,  how 
could  it  conflict  with  the  holiness  of  the  Sabbath  any  more  than 
the  daily  visits  to  the  temple,  above  referred  to  ?  Be  these 
thy  promised  proofs,  Christian  ?  Partr^iunt  monies^  nascltur  ridl- 
culus  mus  ! 

And  now  that  I  have  summarily  disposed  of  the  so-called 
proofs  from  the  new  testament,  in  favor  of  the  change,  and 
which  Christian  ushered  in  with  such  a  flourish  of  trumpets,  ap- 
pealing to  the  practice  of  the  apostles,  which,  like  the  Irishman's 
flea,  wasn't  there  when  wanted,  I  will  present  a  text  from  St. 
Paul,  which*  will  prove  too  much  for  Mr.  "Christian."  "Let 
no  man  judge  you  in  respect  of  a  holiday,  or  of  the  new  moon, 
or  of  the  Sabbath  days  (CoUossians,  i6  c,  2  v.)  No  Sabbaths  ! 
No  holidays  hereafter  !  How  does  that  suit  Messrs.  "  Sabbath" 
and  "  Christian  "  &  Co.  ? 

Mr.  "Christian,"  you  have  unwarrantably  charged  me  with 
either  "most  culpable  ignorance,  or  gross  misrepresentation." 
(I  may  take  my  choice).  So  far  from  retorting,  I  admit  that  you 
have  done  all  that  was  possible  for  a  "  bad  case."  The  bible,  as 
you  now  see,  does  not  refer  to  an  act  of  worship  of  God  on  Sun- 
day, except  one^  and  the  apostle  tells  us  that  that  one  was  done 
daily^  thus  leaving  the  Sabbath  untouched. 

To  conclude;  the  inference  is  unavoidable,  viz.:  the  position 
of  the  bible  christian  is  utterly  untenable.  On  his  own  prin- 
ciples, he  violates  without  warrant  or  shadow  of  excuse,  the  ex- 
press command  of  God  every  week,  and  the  sooner  he  adopts 
other  principles  as  regards  the  Sabbath  observance,  the  better  for 
his  consistency  as  man  and  for  his  salvation  as  a  creature,  amenable 
to  the  laws  of  his  Creator.  There  are  only  two  courses  left 
him,  Judaism,  with  its  observance  of  the  Sabbath,  or  the  Romish 
church,  which  he,  in  fact,  adopts  as  his  guide  in  the  observance 
of  the  Sunday,  and  that,  too,  in  direct  contradiction  of  his  bibli- 
cal principles. 

Before  I  conclude,  I  beg  leave  to  present  to  Christian,  and  his 


THE    KEY  TO  TRUE   CHRISTIANITY.  ^35 

co-religionists,  an  act  of  faith  which  I  merely  put  in  form — the 
substance  was  always  theirs.  I  would  urgently  recommend  its 
recitation  morning  and  evening  for  adults  ;  that  it  be  well  com- 
mitted to  memory  by  children,  and  adopted  in  all  biblical  Sunday 
schools,  so  that  the  children  may  not  err  from  the  "faith  of  their 
fathers,  and  I  would  especially  commend  that  all  preachers  of  the 
"  word,"  and  all  young  men's  christian  associations  of  the  land, 
would  give  it  prominence  in  their  "  rooms  "  and  elsewhere. 

It  will  be  to  biblical  christians  far  more  truthful,  far  more  con- 
cise, and  will  meet  with  far  more  general  acceptance  than  the 
Apostles',  Nicene,  Athanasian  creeds,  or  any  other  formality  of 
faith,  viz. :  "  I  firmly  belfeve,  O  God,  that  the  bible  contains 
thy  whole  revelation  to  man.  I  accept  unhesitatingly  its  teach- 
ings ;  it  alone  is  to  me  my  guide  to  eternal  life;  yet.  Lord,  I 
must  make  at  least  one  exception  to  this  my  rule  of  faith,  viz. : 
contrary  to  thy  express  order  (fourth  precept,  decalogue),  my 
ancestors,  following  the  practice  of  the  Romish  church,  instead 
of  shaking  ofF  this  corruption  with  others,  have  entailed  on  me 
the  necessity  of  following  in  their  footsteps  ;  and  although  I 
know.  Lord,  that  death  was  the  punishment  affixed  to  the  viola- 
tion of  the  Sabbath  (figure  of  eternal  death  to  me  and  all  vio- 
lators for  the  same  offense)  yet  rather  than  submit  to  the  teach- 
ing of  that  church,  or  return  to  the  observance  of  the  Jewish 
Sabbath,  I  accept  all  the  mortification  that  the  anomaly  of  my 
position  entails  before  men,  and  the  terrible  chastisements  as- 
signed by  thy  law  to  the  conscious  violation  of  thy  command  : 
Remember  the  Sabbath  day  to  keep  it  holy."     Let  us  have 

LIGHT. 


[Norfolk  Virghkian,  October  bth,  1872.] 

NORFOLK,  Va.,  Oct.  4,  1872. 

"Sabbath's"  Sabbath,— The  Controversy  G-rowing  Interesting,— "Another  Richmond 
in  the  Field."— Truth  and  Light  Wanted,— Where  is  the  Impetuous  and  Fiery 
Christian? — His  Silence  Damaging  to  his  Cause. 

Mr.  Editor  :  — That  the  dispassionate  (though,  possibly, 
sophistical)  argumentation  of  "Light"  has  completely  (to  em- 
ploy a  familiar,  though  expressive  phrase,)  "  used  up "  the 
more  impetuous  and  fiery  "Christian,"  is  a  fact  which  cannot 


136 


THE    KEY    TO    TRUE   CHRISTIANITY. 


fail  to  be  patent  to  all  minds  free  from  prejudice,  and  even  to 
some  hitherto  accustomed  to  "  Christian's"  mode  of  thinking — 
in  which  category  your  correspondent  takes  rank,  having  been 
reared  under  Anglican  influences.  From  its  inception,  the  con- 
troversy between  "  Light  "  and  "  Christian  "  has  been  watched 
with  great  interest  and  concern,  and  some  of  us  have  awaited 
with  anxious  solicitude  for  the  reply  which  we  have  expected 
"Christian"  to  make  to  the  last  article  from  the  pen  of  "Light." 
Why  has  it  not  put  in  an  appearance  ?  Are  we  to  lose  the  case 
by  default  ?  It  causes  regret  to  see  that  apparently  the  "affected 
accuracy  and  precision  "  of  "  Light  "  (to  quote  from  our  cham- 
pion, "  Christian,")  have  at  last  availed  him  something,  since 
they  have  had  the  effect  of  silencing  his  opponent.  This  will 
naturally  cause  some  to  "  desire  further  light."  Has  the  "  false 
and  delusive  light  of  proud  reason"  yielded  to  honest  conviction 
in  "  Christian's  "  case  ?  If  he  tacitly  acknowledges  himself 
helplessly  vanquished,  and  his  case  is  left  championless,  some  of 
us  will  have  cause  to  waver  and  vaccilate  in  our  faith,  and  un- 
questionably must  this  be  the  case  with  one  still  in  search  of 

TRUTH. 


[Norfolk  ViROiifiAN,  October  6th,  1872.] 

NORFOLK,  Va.,  Oct.  4,  1872. 

"Sabbath's"  Sabbath.— Another  Champion  of  "Sabbath."— A  *' Lover  of  Peace  "  on 
the  Stage.— The  "Unholy"  Work  of  Liight.—" Light "  an  InfiJel. 

EDITOR  VIRGINIAN  : 

Dear  Sir  : — Truly  it  Is  much  to  be  regretted  that  in  this 
christian  community  men  are  found  who  do  not  hesitate  to  hurl, 
and  through  your  most  respectable  and  extensively-read  paper, 
their  venomous  darts  against  the  very  word  of  God  itself.  Such 
was  the  evident  object  of  some  articles  by  "  Light,"  lately  pub- 
lished in  your  columns. 

This  writer  seems  to  have  enlisted  himself  in  a  crusade  for  the 
propagation  of  his  infidel  views,  so  taking  your  readers  by  a  sur- 
prise. Of  course,  we  all  know  that  the  word  of  God,  as  found 
in  the  holy  bible,  to  be  not  only  the  very  basis  and  foundation 
of  religion,  but  even  of  society  itself.     What,  then,  could  have 


THE    KEY  TO    TKUE    CHKISTIANITY, 


137 


better  suited  the  purpose  of  "  Light,"  than  to  shake  men's  faith 
and  confidence  in  that  true  and  safe  guide  which  a  bountiful  God 
has  so  lovingly  placed  within  the  reach  of  all  ?.  Far,  indeed, 
had  he  progressed  in  his  work  if  he  lessened  in  the  heart  of  one 
God-fearing  man  that  respect  and  obedience  which  the  sacred 
word  demands.  Much  might  he  have  boasted  of  his  share  of 
that  work  of  ruin  and  destruction  which  the  propagation  of  his 
doctrines  would   entail,  not  only  on  religion,  but  also  on  society. 

How  wicked,  how  unholy,  then,  to  seek  to  unbridle  the  pas- 
sions of  passionate  men;  to  subject  the  weak  but  just  to  the 
strong  but  cruel.  This  the  laws  of  society  prevent,  this  reli- 
gion prevents,  and  the  disparaging  in  any  way  of  God's  holy 
word  is  nothing  more  than  a  direct  attack  on  the  very  basis  and 
foundation  of  one  and  the  other. 

Let  "Light"  reflect  if  he  saw  those  consequences  on  the 
views  he  so  defiantly  proposed  for  public  consideration.  If  in 
the  face  of  such  consequences  he  wrote  his  articles,  then  there 
is  evidence  sufficie]*t  that  the  teachings  of  "  Light "  differ  very 
materially  from  the  doctrines  of  that  Light,  "  who  is  the  way, 


the  truth,  and  the  life.' 


A  LOVER  OF  PEACE. 


[Norfolk  Viroinian,  October  8th,  1872.] 

OLD  POINT  COMFORT,  OCTOBER  7,  1872. 

"Sabbath's"  Sabbath— "Light  Pays  His  Respects  to  Madame  " Lover  of  Peace"— 
The  Case  taking  a  New  Turn— Bold  Declarations— Detending,  not  Subverting— 
"There's  Nobody  Hurt,"  &o. 

Editor  Virginian  :  Do  me  the  favor  to  assure  the  whining 
old  lady  who  signs  herself  "  Lover  of  Peace,"  that  she  has  no 
reason  to  be  alarmed  ;  that  I  am  an  old  physician  of  over  twenty 
years'  practice  (homoeopathic  or  allopathic,  I  will  not  say) ; 
that  my  experience  and  success  as  such  ought  to  be  a  guarantee 
that  I  will  not  use  the  scalpel  for  destruction,  but  rather  to  save 
the  life  of  my  patients  ;  that  so  far  from  seeking  to  subvert  the 
bible,  I  was  only  defending  the  bible  against  a  practice  which  I 
have,  to  a  demonstration,  shown  to  be  in  direct  hostility  to  its 
teachings  as  regards  the  substitution  of  Sunday  for  the  Sabbath 
enjoined  by  God  j  that  the  practice  is  utterly  indefensible  on  the 


2^38  '^^^   ^^^  TO    TKUE    CHKISTIANITY. 

biblical  platform — a  mere  servile  Imitation  of  the  catholic  church, 
without  the  shadow  of  excuse  for  the  now  conscious  violation  of 
God's  ordinance,  and  that  it  is  accident  alone,  occasioned  by  the 
ravings  of  "  Sabbath,"  that  has  called  my  attention  to  the  biblical 
system  and  its  strange  anomalies  ;  that  at  first  glance,  before 
making  a  careful  diagnosis  of  the  system,  I  discovered  a  hideous 
excrescence  on  the  corpus  of  my  patient,  which  I  carefully  re- 
moved and  gave  gratuitously  the  result  of  the  operation  to  the 
public;  that,  alas  !  whilst  thus  occupied  I  made  a  discovery,  viz: 
That  the  excrescence  which  I  exposed  was  itself  seated  on  an 
enormous  polypus,  which,  if  I  have  time,  I  will  undertake  to 
remove,  and  will  respectfully  invite  the  public  to  be  present  and 
witness  the  operation. 

Putting  aside  professional  terms,  I  invite  Madame  "  Lover  of 
Peace"  and  her  friends  to  a  formal  declaration  which  I  now  make, 
and  which  I  will  make  good  (as  I  did  the  declaration  that  no  one 
could,  on  biblical  principles,  justify  the  substitution  of  Sunday 
for  the  Sabbath),  viz  :  That  it  is  impossible  for  any  christian 
accepting  the  bible  as  his  sole  rule  of  faith,  to  prove  it,  to  any 
rational  being,  to  be  the  word  of  God^  or  a  Divine  revelation,  and 
therefore  that  no  christian  can  rationally,  on  such  principles, 
make  an  act  of  faith  in  the  scriptures.  I  have  no  doubt  that  the 
declaration  will  produce  a  holy  horror — a  turning  up  of  many 
pious  eyes — shocked  feelings — weeping,  and  gnashing  of  teeth, 
&c.  But  who  can,  on  such  hypothesis,  consent  for  a  moment 
to  be  a  member  of  a  body  that  possesses  a  mere  galvanized  ex- 
istence, and  not  even  the  first  principles  of  healthy  vitality  ?  I 
am  perfectly  serious,  Madame  "  Lover  of  Peace"  and  friends.  I 
have  discovered  an  immense  polypus — the  patient  will  perish 
unless  it  be  removed.  I  am  ready  with  scalpel  in  hand — expe- 
rienced and  cool.  If  invited  to  take  the  case  in  hand,  I  pledge 
myself  that  the  work  will  be  skilfully  executed,  and  the  ''modus 
operandi"  plainly  explained  to  the  public.  Respects  to  the  old 
lady,  and   assure   her,  in  the  words  of  the  "late  lamented" — 

"  there's  nobody  hurt." 

LIGHT. 


THE  KEY  TO  TRUE  CHKISTIANITY. 


izd 


[Norfolk  Virginian,  October  16th,  1873.] 

NORFOLK,  Va.,  OCTOBER  15,  1872. 

"Sabbath,"  "Light,"  "Christian,"  "A  Lover  of  Peace,"  and  "Truth,"  Partially 

Reviewed. 

Mr.  Editor  :  I  do  not  know  whether  you  are  a  professor 
of  experimental  religion  or  not,  but  one  thing  I  do  know,  that 
while  your  paper  is  a  secular  or  political  journal,  it  has  afforded 
me  very  great  pleasure  to  see  the  moral  and  religious  teachings 
of  yourself,  and  those  also  of  your  city  editor ;  they  have  been 
very  nearly  unexceptional.  But  I  notice  at  the  head  of  "  Light's" 
reply  to  "Christian,"  the  words,  "Christian  Castigated,"  which 
I  suppose  you  wrote,  for  surely  "  Light,"  with  all  of  his  arrogant 
vanity,  did  not  presume  to  put  that  heading  to  his  letter  himself. 
If  you  did  it  1  must  suppose  that  you  read  "  Christian's"  letter 
rather  casually,  as  "  Christian"  got  no  "  castigation"  at  the  hands 
of  "  Light ;"  and  "Light"  failed  to  notice  one  of  the  most  im- 
portant arguments  of  "  Christian."  Of  course  it  was  commend- 
able for  his  cause  for  him  to  do  so. 

Now  allow  me  to  say  a  word  to  you  about  your  city  .editor.  He 
is  ever  ready  to  advocate  the  cause  of  religion,  and  all  benevolent 
and  christian  institutions  receive  his  unqualified  support.  More- 
over he  is  kind-hearted  to  the  dead,  for  nearly  all  of  the  deaths 
he  comments  upon  he  sends  the  deceased  right  home  to  heaven 
in  a  full  blaze  of  glory.  Nevertheless,  I  have  something  against 
him.  Occasionally  he  kicks  over  his  buckets  of  milk.  Such  I 
conceive  he  has  done  when  he  advocated  the  cause  of  the  Sunday 
excursion  to  Richmond,  which  originated  "Light's"  controversy. 
I  wish  I  could  review  in  full  the  letters  of  your  correspondents 
"Sabbath,"  "Light,"  "Christian,"  "  A  Lover  of  Peace,"  and 
"Truth."  But  as  it  would  requirfe  at  least  four  columns,  I 
could  not  request  so  much  space  in  your  paper  for  that  purpose. 

Now  to  the  point  (and  I  promise  to  be  as  brief  as  the  case  will 
possibly  admit).  A  steamer  advertised  to  make  an  excursion 
trip  from  this  place  on  the  Sabbath  day  to  Richmond.  A  cor- 
respondent of  yours,  evidently  a  christian,  signing  the  name 
"  Sabbath,"  wrote  you  a  mild,  respectful  letter  (which  you  pub- 
lished), protesting  against  the  Sabbath  day  being  desecrated  in 
that  way,  and  asked  if  the  press  would  not  condemn  it,  saying  it 


140 


THE    KEY  TO  TKUE    CHRISTIANITY. 


could  not  be  for  the  small  sum  of  such  an  advertisement  that  it 
would  advocate  It.  Now,  sir,  I  go  no  further  than  your  office 
for  a  judge,  but  ask  you  if  the  above  statements  are  not  substan- 
tially correct,  especially  as  to  spirit,  the  mildness,  the  courteous- 
ness,  and  respectfulness  of  "  Sabbath's"  letter  ?  It  very  soon 
appeared  that  another  correspondent  found  you,  who  wrote  you 
upon  the  same  subject,  an  old  gentleman  of  Old  Point,  who 
probably  "  neither  fears  God  nor  regards  man,"  who  signs  him- 
self to  his  productions  "  Light."  This  old  man  (for  he  says  In 
his  last  letter  that  he  Is  an  old  "physician,"  and  consequently  an 
old  man,  and  at  least  In  some  respects  it  is  true)  took  exception 
to  the  letter  of  "  Sabbath,"  and  endeavored  to  prove  from  scrip- 
ture that  "Sabbath's"  Sabbath  was  no  Sabbath,  but  another  day. 
He  does  not  quote  scripture  because  he  believes  the  scriptures, 
but  as  a  Sabbath-breaker  to  justify  himself,  just  as  the  serpent 
by  his  subtle  artfulness  beguiled  Eve.  He  persuaded  her  to 
believe  that  she  should  not  surely  die  If  she  partook  of  the  for- 
bidden fruit.  Oh  no  !  God  was  too  good  !  to  carry  out  that 
penalty!  But  oh!  the  suffering  of  the  race  in  consequence  of 
her  disobedience  to  God's  command  !  "  Light"  defends  the 
bible  in  the  same  way  that  King  Herod  wanted  to  defend  the 
young  child.  He  wanted  to  worship  the  young  child,  but  only 
for  the  purpose  of  slaying  him.  Our  hero  defends  the  bible  for 
the  purpose  of  destroying  Christianity  ;  he  quotes  the  scriptures 
and  defends  the  bible  just  as  Satan  did  to  our  Saviour  when  he 
tempted  him  to  fall  down  and  worship  him. 

Now,  Mr.  Editor,  "  Light"  tells  you  that  in  South  America 
Saturday,  the  correct  day,  is  kept  for  the  Sabbath,  and  In  no 
other  Christian  countrv.  When  a  witness  goes  before  a  court 
of  justice  to  testify  in  a  case,  he  Is  sworn  not  only  to  "tell  the 
truth,  but  the  whole  truth,"  and  If  he  fails  "to  tell  the  whole 
truih"  he  virtually  perjures  himself,  and  if  It  be  known  It  Invali- 
dates his  whole  testimony.  Why  did  not  "  Light"  tell  the  whole 
truth  about  the  countries  of  South  America  ;  why  did  he  not 
tell  you  that  all  days  are  alike  In  most  of  those  countries,  so  far  as 
business  Is  concerned.  He  knew  there  Is  no  day  there  recognized 
and  enforced  by  law  as  the  Sabbath  ;  he  knew  that  although 
those  Catholic  people  go  to  their  churches  on  Sabbath,  and  go 
through  more  ceremony  than  on  other  days,  that  then  they  return 


THE  KEY  TO  TRUE  CHRISTIANITY.  241 

home  and  resume  their  work  and  business  as  a  general  thing. 
Here  it  is  different.  We  have  a  day  recognized  and  enforced 
by  law  as  the  Sabbath,  and  all  good  citizens  respect  it,  whether 
they  are  christians  or  not.  "  Light,"  in  his  reply  to  "  Christian," 
was  exceedingly  careful  not  to  say  one  word  about  the  ceremo- 
nial law  that  "  Christian"  showed  was  changed,  or  done  away, 
after  the  advent  of  our  Saviour.  He  knew  that  any  admission 
of  a  change  in  the  Abrahamic,  Mosaic,  or  ceremonial  law,  would 
put  him  to  silence  in  his  boastful  position  ;  his  theory  of  no 
change  since  the  coming  of  our  Saviour  would  prove  too  much 
for  his  cause.  Now  if  there  was  ever  a  ceremonial  law  given  by 
God,  through  Moses,  and  Christ  has  not  come  and  done  away 
and  changed  that  law,  it  is  still  binding,  and  if  that  law  is  still 
binding,  the  usages  of  that  day,  with  all  the  customs  that  were 
not  sinful  then,  would  not  be  sinful  now,  and  be  admissible,  if 
not  expedient.  Let  us  look  at  a  few  cases.  The  patriarch 
Jacob  was  a  "  man  after  God's  own  heart,"  yet  he  had  four  wives; 
the  fathers  of  the  twelve  tribes  of  Israel  were  all  Jacob's  children, 
but  they  had  four  mothers,  all  living  with  Jacob  at  the  same 
time,  and  it  was  no  sin  to  him,  for  he  followed  "  the  Lord  with 
a  perfect  heart."  Look  at  the  case  of  Solomon,  he  had  seven 
hundred  wives  and  three  hundred  concubines,  but  he  was 
not  condemned  for  that,  neither  did  he  lose  God's  favor 
for  that.  But  not  being  satisfied,  he  loved  strange  women 
(heathen  women),  and  they  turned  his  heart  from  God,  and 
then  he  lost  God's  favor.  Now  if  there  had  been  no  change 
in  the  ceremonial  law  neither  need  there  be  in  the  customs  of 
that  day.  Imagine  a  man  in  our  day  with  a  thousand  wives,  he 
buys  them  a  fashionable  dress  pattern  ;  now,  even  if  he  had  Solo- 
mon's revenue,  how  long  would  it  take  him  to  become  a  bank- 
rupt ?  If  those  past  customs  now  prevailed,  even  if  it  was  not 
the  grossest  immorality  and  sin  (which  it  would  be),  and  our  old 
friend  "  Light"  should  have  happened  to  have  strayed  into  the 
diiEculty  of  having  a  thousand  wives  hanging  around  him,  I  think 
he  would  wish  there  had  been  a  christian  dispensation  to  have 
that  custom  done  away,  and  it  is  more  likely  he  would  try  the 
virtue  of  about  nine  hundred  and  ninety-nine  divorces,  besides  a 
dispensation  to  do  away  with  all  of  the  ceremonies  of  the  law 
of  Moses,  and  all  of  the  customs  prevalent  at  that  day  was  for  the 


j^9  THE  KEY  TO  TRUE  CHRISTIA.NITY. 

best.  No  matter  how  poor  the  sinner  is,  now  he  needs  neither 
birds  or  beasts  to  bring  to  the  altar  as  a  sacrifice;  but  he  may 
come  just  as  he  is,  all  the  sacrifice  required  is  a  penitential,  broken 
and  contrite  heart.  Well,  if  the  christian  dispensation  has 
changed,  or  done  away  the  Jewish  law,  so  may  it  change  the 
Jewish  Sabbath.  All  the  commands  of  God  to  the  patriarchs  in 
their  day,  and  to  Moses,  for  the  offering  of  beasts  and  birds  upon 
the  altar  of  sacrifice,  were  right  and  binding.  It  will  be  remem- 
bered that  everything  offered  was  to  be  without  blemish,  because 
it  was  typical  of  the  coming  Saviour,  who,  without  spot  or  blem- 
ish, offered  Himself  upon  the  cross  a  sacrifice  for  the  sins  of  the 
whole  world.  Therefore  now  whoever  attempts  to  worship  in 
imitation  of  those  past  ceremonies,  by  the  offering  of  beasts  and 
birds,  or  the  burning  of  incense  and  bowing  to  images,  are  idol- 
ators,  as  much  so  as  the  heathen  who  never  heard  of  the  true 
God,  and  daily  bow  down  to  gods  made  by  his  own  hands. 
"  Light"  says  Saturday  is  the  Sabbath  of  the  bible  instead  of  Sun- 
day. Now  the  narrative  says  that  in  six  days  God  -made  the 
world.  "Thus  the  heavens  and  the  earth  were  finished  and  all 
the  hosts  of  them.  And  on  the  seventh  day  God  ended  His 
work  which  He  had  made,  and  rested  on  the  seventh  day  from  all 
His  work  which  He  had  made.  And  God  blessed  the  seventh 
day  and  it  was  sanctified.'*  Now  it  is  supposed  that  about  four 
thousand  years  had  passed  to  the  time  of  the  advent.  Will 
"Light"  pretend  that  he  can  prove  from  the  bible  or  any  other 
source,  that  Saturday,  our  present  seventh  day,  is  the  identical 
successive  seventh  of  the  first  seventh  on  which  God  rested  from 
all  His  labors  ?  Will  he  pretend  that  he  can  show  from  the 
bible  that  the  present  Jewish  Sabbath  is  positively  and  unmistak- 
ably the  true  successive  of  the  seventh  on  which  God  rested  ; 
that  through  all  time  past  it  has  never  been  interrupted  or 
changed  ?  It  may  be,  or  it  may  not  be,  but  if  it  be  he  cannot 
prove  It  from  the  bible.  Unless  he  can  positively  show  beyond 
a  shadow  of  doubt  that  the  present  Jewish  Sabbath  is  the  identi- 
cal seventh  of  the  first  seventh  day  after  creation  (even  if  he 
were  to  admit  that  the  change  by  the  christian  world  from  the 
Jewish  Sabbath  to  the  present  christian  Sabbath  were  unavoid- 
able or  wrong),  his  whole  argument  to  prove  that  Christianity  is 
keeping  the  wrong  day,  is  not  worth  a  straw.      A  long  time  had 


THE  KEY  TO  TRUE  CHRISTIANITY.  -tAQ 

elapsed  from  the  creation  of  time  to  the  giving  of  ceremonial 
law  by  Moses.  Also  was  it  a  long  time  from  the  giving  of  the 
law  by  Moses  to  the  advent  of  our  Saviour  into  the  world.  Who 
knows  but  through  these  long  periods  of  time  the  first  seventh 
day  had  never  been  interrupted  or  changed.  We  know  that  the 
christian  Sabbath  has  remained  the  same  from  its  first  institution; 
we  know  that  God  has  blessed  the  christian  Sabbath  ;  we  know 
that  God  has  sent  the  Holy  Ghost  down  with  power  upon  His 
people  while  worshiping  Him  upon  the  christian  Sabbath  dav  ; 
we  know  that  the  little  stone  that  was  cut  out  of  the  mountain 
has  been  rolling  on,  and  is  still  rolling  on,  and  until  every  isle  of 
the  sea  shall  find  rest  under  its  shadow,  and  the  praise  of  the  Re- 
deemer of  man  shall  be  heard  from  every  hill  top  and  every  val- 
ley on  every  side  of  this  globe  on  the  christian  Sabbath,  and  God 
will  sanctify  the  christian  Sabbath  ;  and  if  all  the  devils  in  per- 
dition were  to  form  in  solid  column,  and  were  to  be  reinforced 
by  all  enemies  of  Christianity  in  the  world,  and  were  to  make  one 
concentrated  attack  upon  Christianity,  the  little  stone  would  con- 
tinue to  roll  on.  Your  correspondent  "Light's"  defence  of  the 
bible  is  worthless.  If  the  bible  had  to  depend  upon  his  defence 
it  would  not  stand  twenty-four  hours.  Mr.  Editor,  "  Light" 
tells  you  in  his  last  communication  that  he  is  defending,  not 
writing  to  destroy  the  bible.  "  Light's"  vanity  and  self-approba- 
tion is  without  a  parallel.  He  has  persuaded  himself  (nobody 
else)  to  a  demonstration  that  he  has  succeeded  in  proving  that  the 
Sabbath  is  no  Sabbath.  Not  that  he,  like  the  devout  Jew,  has 
any  more  regard  for  Saturday  as  the  Sabbath  than  he  has  for 
"  Sabbath,"  for  he  regards  neither  as  a  holy  day,  and  while  he 
defends  the  bible,  it  is  alone  for  the  purpose  of  trying  to  strike  a 
death-blow  at  Christianity,  by  which,  if  he  could  succeed,  it 
would  be  easy  to  prove  the  bible  a  cunningly  devised  fable.  And 
now,  having  thrown  off^  his  mask,  that  is  evidently  what  he  pur- 
poses to  do  ;  one  must  suppose,  from  the  exalted  estimate  that 
your  correspondent  places  upon  his  own  abilities,  that  he  expects 
to  put  the  talents  of  his  forerunners,  Hume,  Hobbs,  Gibbon,  and 
the  great  Voltaire,  in  the  shade,  who  labored  in  the  same  cause. 
For  with  their  great  talents  they  failed  to  overthrow  Christianity. 
'*•  Light's"  self-conceit  has  persuaded  him  by  a  little  flippant  let- 
ter writing,  that  he  has  discovered  a  mighty  lever  by  which  hq 


144 


THE    KEY  TO  TRUE    CHRISTIANITY. 


intends  to  overthrow  the  noble  s*-ructure  of  Christianity  that  has 
Stood  the  storms  of  more  than  eighteen  hundred  winters. 

Look,  Mr.  Editor,  at  "  Light's"  unparalleled  vanity.  After 
making  certain  assertions  in  his  last  letter,  he  says,  "  I  have  no 
doubt  that  the  declaration  will  produce  a  holy  horror,  a  turning 
up  of  many  pious  eyes,  shocking  feelings,  weeping  and  gnashing 
of  teeth,"  &c.  What  consummate  vanity  !  Hold,  old  fiend  ! 
Hold  !  Please  don't  be  frightened  at  the  enormous  shocks  of 
your  own  earthquake  !  for  nobody  else  will.  Please  take  notice 
that  the  whole  ground  you  propose  to  occupy  has  been  fought 
over  before.  Your  propositions  are  nothing  '  new  under  the 
sun."  Hands  and  voices,  perhaps  nearly  equal  to  yours,  have 
done  their  worst,  but  to-day  Christianity  stands  erect !  is  stronger 
to-day  than  it  ever  has  been  since  the  day  that  Herod  sought  to 
slay  the  "  young  child."  With  all  that  you  have  said,  or  can  say, 
you  will  hurt  no  christian,  real  or  nominal.  No  one  will  be 
frightened  by  the  mighty  thunder  that  you  have  uttered.  No  one 
will  be  horrified  by  those  mutterings.  No  pious  eyes  will  be 
turned  towards  you  with  fright.  No  one's  teeth  will  gnash  with 
fright  at  your  thunder !  The  world  will  stand  as  long  probably 
as  if  you  had  not  have  thundered  !  And  If  you  do  not  destroy 
yourself  by  the  shock  of  your  earthquake,  nobody  will  be  hurt. 

Now,  Mr.  Editor,  it  is  really  amusing  when  "  Light"  tells  you 
it  was  "accident  alone,  occasioned  by  the  ravings  of  'Sabbath,'" 
&c.,  to  read  his  truly  "ravings"  at  his  "Madame,  A  Lover  of 
Peace."  She  has  completely  thrown  him  off  his  balance,  caus- 
ing him  to  forget  to  be  courteous  and  affable  to  her  effeminacy. 
But  the  "old  lady"  has  laid  It  on  him  so  sharp  that  he  "raves" 
like  a  madman  with  the  hydrophobia,  and  he  commences  his 
attack  on  her  by  calling  her  ugly  names,  something  unusual  for 
those  of  his  school  to  do.  Mr.  Editor,  I  do  not  know  whether 
your  correspondent,  "  A  Lover  of  Peace,"  is  an  "  old  lady"  or 
not,  but  I  suppose  so.  "  Light"  says  so.  And  It  Is  said  that 
nothing  makes  a  rickety,  gouty  old  doctor  so  mad  as  to  be  se- 
verely lashed  by  an  "  old  lady."  So,  in  the  absence  of  other 
evidence,  Instinct  would  tell  him  she  was  an  "old  lady;"  for 
these  old  doctors  are  an  Instinctive  set.  The  "old  lady"  has 
lashed  him  so  severely  that  In  revenge  he  has  looked  around,  and 
supposes  he  has  made  a  mighty  "  discovery,"   by  which,  after 


THE    KEY  TO  TRUE    CHRISTIANITY.  -^^^ 

operating  upon  the  "  old  lady,"  he  proposes  to  use  his  mighty- 
lever,  he  has  discovered,  to  destroy  Christianity  at  one  mighty 
stroke ;  and  with  that  destruction  the  bible  falls  also. 

Mr.  Editor,  I  don't  think  the  "  old  lady,  a  lover  of  peace,"  is 
very  timid,  but  permit  me  to  say  to  her,  that  she  has  so  enraged 
"Light,"  that  he  is  now  in  a  humor,  not  only  to  take  out  her 
tumor,  but  also  her  heart  with  it.  "  Old  lady,"  )ou  have  no- 
thing to  fear  from  the  doctor's  old  rusty  knife,  although  he  says 
he  has  been  using  it  for  twenty  years.  I  doubt  whether  he  has 
succeeded  in  persuading  a  single  patient  to  disbelieve  Christianity. 
I  do  not  place  the  great  estimate  upon  his  abilities  that  he  does 
himself.  No,  "old  lady."  There  is  no  harm  in  him.  His 
dirty  old  scalpe  has  neither  point  nor  edge.  But  doubtless  he 
thinks  himself  a  perfect  Samson.  And  that  he  now  holds  the 
main  pillars  of  the  temple  in  his  hands  ;  and  that  he  is  now  only 
waiting  a  favorable  opportunity  to  bow  himself,  and  level  the 
mighty  temple  of  Christianity  with  the  ground,  and  bury  all  of  its 
devotees  in  the  ruins  thereof.  But  that  does  not  alter  the  truth 
of  God's  revealed  will  to  man  by  His  holy  word.  No,  my  dear, 
old,  rickety,  gouty  "  homoeopathy,"  for  you  are  not  "  allopathy." 
You  need  not  have  taken  such  pains  to  warn  Christianity  to  get 
out  of  your  way.  Hume  failed,  Hobbs  failed.  Gibbon  failed, 
Voltaire  failed.     And  the  lesser  "light"  will  fail. 

Now,  Mr.  Editor,  if  you  please,  a  few  words  in  reference  to 
"Truth."  It  requires  no  stretch  of  the  imagination  to  see  that 
"Truth"  has  assumed  a  partial  mask,  as  did  "Light."  He  does  not 
wish  to  come  out  as  a  bold  ally  of  "  Light,"  nevertheless  he  has 
shown  by  his  writing  that  he  is  in  full  accord  with  him  ;  for  he  calls 
the  effusion  of  "Light  "  dispassionate,  and  the  writing  of  "Chris- 
tian "  impetuous  and  fiery.  He  has  a  strange  idea  of  the  defini- 
tion of  the  word  impetuosity.  He  says  it  is  a  fact  which  cannot 
fail  to  be  patent  to  all  minds  free  from  prejudice,  and  even  to 
some  hitherto  accustomed  to  Christian's  mode  of  thinking,  in 
which  category  your  correspondent  takes  rank,  etc.  His  words, 
"even  to  some  hitherto,"  clearly  shows  that  he  thinks  all  chris- 
tians "  prejudiced."  His  word  "  hitherto  "  shows  that  he  has 
lost  the  effect  of  his  religious  training,  though  he  might  have  been 
only  a  nominal  christian.  It  was  worth  more  to  him  by  culti- 
vating it,  and  seeking   for  the  whole  '^truth  "  as  it  is  in  Christ, 

10 


146 


THE  KEY  TO  TRUE  CHRISTIANITY. 


by  humble  prayer  and  faith,  and  calling  upon  the  God  of  his 
sainted  mother  (perhaps  now  in  heaven),  who  took  him  by  her 
side  and  taught  him  to  say:  "Our  Father,  who  art  in  heaven," 
than  the  riches  of  a  thousand  worlds  like  this.  May  the  Lord 
help  him  to  return  to  the  pious  teachings  of  the  God  of  his  father 
and  mother.  For  the  very  worst  wish  that  I  find  in  my  heart  to 
make  against  "Truth"  and  old  friend  "Light,"  is  that  they  may 
find  the  true  light  that  outshines  the  brightness  of  the.  noonday 
sun  on  a  cloudless  day.  That  "  truth  "  that  all  of  the  opposing 
elements  of  Christianity  cannot  shake  loose  from  its  solid  foun- 
dations, because  it  is  founded  upon  a  solid  rock.  And  when  the 
angel  Gabriel  shall  sound  the  last  loud  trump,  and  the  countless 
hosts  of  the  buried  dead  shall  burst  through  the  green  sward  that 
covers  their  graves,  and  spring  forth  into  life,  and  old  ocean,  with 
one  mighty  wave  shall  roll  her  unnumbered  millions  to  the  shore  ! 
and  the  crucified,  risen,  ascended  Saviour  shall  return  to  earth  the 
"  second  time,"  not  as  a  redeemer,  nor  as  an  intercessor,  but  as  a 
judge  !  I  pray  God,  Mr.  Editor,  that  you,  with  all  your  corre- 
spondents, "Sabbath,"  "Light,"  "A  Lover  of  Peace,"  "Truth," 
and  the  writer  (my  heart  expands,  and  I  add  all  of  Adam's  race 
for  whom  there  is  yet  hope),  may  be  found  in  that  glorious  com- 
pany that  John  said  no  man  could  number,  that  had  washed  their 
robes  and  made  them  white  in  the  blood  of  the  Lamb. 

It  is  certain  that  no  christian,  real  or  nominal,  thinks,  as 
"Truth"  professes  to  think,  that  "Light"  has  been  "dispassion- 
ate," or  that  "  Christian "  has  been  "  impetuous  and  fiery." 
"  Christian's "  statements  were  plain,  calm,  and  courteously 
spoken  facts,  enforced  by  scriptural* truths,  quoted  from  scrip- 
ture, and  enforced  by  mild  but  decisive  arguments,  conclusive  to 
all  minds  not  "  prejudiced  "  against  Christianity.  "  Truth  "  says 
he  is  one  still  in  search  of  truth.  If  that  is  really  so,  he  has  adopted 
a  poor  method  of  finding  it,  by  writing  sophistical  and  semi,  or 
at  least  quarto  letters,  and  charging  "  Christian  "  with  a  method 
of  writing  of  which  he  was  not  guilty.  If  "  Truth  "  really  wishes 
to  find  the  "truth,"  let  him  take  his  bible.  There  he  will  find 
that  it  says  the  way  is  so  plain,  that  a  wayfaring  man,  though  a 
fool,  need  not  err  therein.  He  will  find  the  "  truth,"  if  he  ap- 
proaches the  Lord  as  did  the  poor  publican,  when  he  smote  upon 
his  breast,  and  said,  "  God  be  merciful  to  a  sinner."     If  he  thus 


THE    KEY   TO    TRUE    CHKISTIANITY. 


147 


approaches  God,  in  the  name  of  the  Redeemer  of  man,  he  will 
be  sure  to  find  the  "truth."  And  when  the  impression  is  made 
upon  his  heart,  "peace  be  still  !"  or  "go  in  peace  and  sin  no 
more,"  or  "thy  sins  are  forgiven,"  there  will  be  such  a  glorious 
"light"  spring  up  into  his  heart,  upon  the  very  foundations  of 
"truth,"  that  it  will  cause  him  to  exclaim,  "behold,  the  half  was  not 
told  me."  And  when  that  true  "light"  springs  up  into  his  soul, 
probably  the  first  thought  that  will  come  into  his  mind  will  cause 
him  to  say.  Oh  !  my  mother !  oh  !  my  father !  I  feel  I  am  going 
to  meet  you  in  the  better  land,  "  where  the  wicked  cease  from 
troubling,  and  the  weary  are  forever  at  rest." 

Respectfully, 

S.  L.  B. 


[Norfolk  VinaiNiAN,  October  20th,  1872.] 

A  LAST  WORD  FROM  LIGHT  IN  VINDICATION 
OF  HIMSELF  AND  HIS  POSITION. 

OLD  POINT  COMFORT,  October  19,  1872. 

Editor  Virginian  : — Surely  courtesy  does  not  require  that  a 
correspondent  should  be  obliged  to  defend  himself  against  the 
wild,  aimless  attacks  of  every  scribbler  who  feels  authorized  to 
deliver  himself  of  senseless  abuse,  and  then  with  impunity  to  re- 
tire from  the  arena.  I  found  it  necessary  to  rebuke  "  Sabbath  ;" 
he  disappeared,  then  a  writer  of  culture  ("  Christian  ")  who  cer- 
tainly wielded  an  energetic  pen,  and  with  whom  I  had  hoped  to 
break  more  than  one  lance,  graced  your  columns  with  an  article 
fraught  with  erudition  and  style,  and  evincing  a  refined  notion  of 
the  amenities  of  life.  In  my  reply  I  treated  him  with  that  con- 
sideration which  his  production  deserved.  Finding,  however,  my 
arguments  too  much  for  him,  he,  "  deeming  prudence  the  better 
part  of  valor,"  gracefully  left  me  in  possession  of  the  field. 

A  third  writer  ("A  Lover  of  Peace,")  I  barely  noticed  with  a 
few  jocular  remarks,  simply  because  there  was  no  effort  at  argu- 
ment, nothing  tangible  whereon  I  might  remark  in  connection 
with  the  question  at  issue.  I  never  again  expect  to  hear  a  whine 
from  the  "  old  lady." 


;[48  THE   KEY   TO   TRUE   CHRISTIANITY, 

But  in  sober  earnestness,  I  ask,  am  I  expected  to  notice  the  pro- 
duction that  graced  (?)  your  pages  of  the  17th  instant?  A  Re- 
viewer, forsooth  !  shades  of  Sidney  Smith,  Macauly,  etc.,  etc., 
what  a  misnomer !  What  between  laughing  and  sympathy  for 
the  writer,  I  have  been  all  day  in  a  strange  mood.  Has  the 
poor  man  no  friends  who  will  kindly  see  to  it  that  he  will  not 
again  expose  himself?  Had  I  his  address  I  would  seek  to  atone 
for  the  defects  of  his  early  education  by  furnishing  him  with  a 
dictionary  and  English  grammar  ;  but  alas  !  I  fear  that  it  is  too 
late,  and  that  he  will  never  master  the  primary  rudiments  of  his 
own  language.  Nor  does  his  undisciplined  mind  evince  the 
slightest  logical  acumen  ;  some  minds  are  naturally  consecutive, 
but  our  friend  can  honestly  stand  guiltless  of  the  charge,  as  is 
witnessed  in  some  of  his  sentences,  wherein  he  buries  his  head  in 
a  bank  of  mud,  and  you  lose  sight  of  him  until  he  starts  the 
next  sentence.  On  the  whole,  I  must  confess  that,  while  I 
have  been  reading  newspapers  with  some  degree  of  attention  for 
over  thirty  years,  a  more  senseless,  aimless,  unlettered  produc- 
tion has  never  met  my  eyes. 

However,  before  I  take  leave  of  this  writer,  I  will  note  a 
remark  made  by  him  in  reference  to  the  Sabbath.  He  asks, 
"  Will  he  (Light)  pretend  that  he  can  show  from  the  bible  that 
the  present  Jewish  Sabbath  is  positively,  etc.,  the  true  suc- 
cession of  the  seventh  day  on  which  God  rested  ?  It  may  be, 
or  it  may  not  be,  but  if  it  be,  he  cannot  prove  it  from  the  bible." 
In  reply  I  would  hazard  the  assertion  that  the  Son  of  God,  who 
calls  Himself  (Matt.  12c.,  8  v.)  the  Lord  of  the  Sabbath,  knew 
as  much  of  the  matter  as  our  very  erudite  friend  ;  as  He  was 
omniscient,  did  He  not  know  that  for  four  thousand  years  the 
people  of  God  were  keeping  the  wrong  day  ?  And  if  they  were, 
would  he  not  have  corrected  the  error  ?  Whereas,  on  the  other 
hand.  His  evangelists,  in  their  simplicity,  never  harbored  a  sus- 
picion for  a  moment  that  they  were  keeping  the  wrong  day. 
The  Sabbath  (Saturday)  is  referred  to  in  more  than  seventy  in- 
stances in  the  new  testament,  by  Christ,  His  apostles  and  evan- 
gelists. He  taught,  as  St.  Luke  inform  us  (4  c,  31  v.)  on  the 
Sabbath  day,  and  no  other ;  the  words  of  the  text  are :  "  He 
came  down  to  Capernaum,  a  city  of  Galilee,  and  taught  there 
on  the   Sabbath  days."     He  promised  eternal  life  to  the  young 


THE  KEY  TO  TEUE  CHRISTIANITY.  ^49 

man  (who  had  asked  him  what  he  should  do  to  attain  it)  if  he 
would  keep  the  commandments,  including,  of  course,  the  Sab- 
bath day,  without  any  change  or  modification,  and  it  is  worthy 
of  observation,  that  the  fourth  command  was  given  with  an  em- 
phasis peculiarly  its  own  ;  for  God  says.  Remember  the  Sabbath, 
etc.  The  day,  therefore,  that  Christ  recognized  and  endorsed 
as  the  Sabbath  day,  the  day  he  confirmed  in  the  new  testament 
when  He  promulgated  anew  the  commandments,  the  day  He 
chose  whereon  to  teach  His  doctrines  (St.  Luke),  in  preference 
to  all  others,  and  to  substitute  which  by  another,  there  is  not  a 
word  said  in  the  new  law,  is  the  day,  the  only  day,  to  be  kept  by 
those  who  profess  to  follow  the  bible  for  their  guide.  This  is 
conclusive  and  final. 

I  wish  it,  however,  to  be  understood  that  I  am  not  infidel 
enough  to  seek  to  destroy  or  diminish  in  the  least  the  practice 
of  keeping  Sunday — better  that  day  than  none — but  I  maintain 
that  the  system  of  Christianity  that  holds  that  the  bible  is  the 
only  and  original  source  of  christian  faith,  is  lamentably  inade- 
quate to  furnish  the  believer  with  grounds  for  the  change  of  day, 
whilst  it  furnishes  the  unbeliever  with  ample  material  to  charge 
its  followers  with  the  grossest  inconsistency  ;  because  their  prac- 
tice is  in  direct  violation  of  the  fundamental  principles  of  their 
religion,  and  is,  in  fact,  a  constant  rebellion  against  what  they 
profess  to  call  the  law  of  God.  But  this  is  not  all.  I  fearlessly 
assert  that  this  is  only  one  of  the  many  contradictions  derivable 
from  the  system.  I  maintain  that  the  whole  system  is  funda- 
mentally wrong ;  that  it  has  no  basis  ;  that  the  christian  who 
adheres  to  it  is  surrounded  with  difficulties  insuperable.  Meanwhile 
I  commend  S.  L.  B.  to  the  kind  attentions  and  good  offices  of 
his  friends. 

I  had  proposed,  as  I  promised,  to  expose  the  utter  inconsecu- 
tiveness  of  the  system  to  which  my  attention  had  been  calkd, 
and  if  my  antagonists  will  unite  with  me  in  soliciting  you,  Mr. 
Editor,  to  withdraw  your  veto  to  further  writing  on  the  subject, 
I  will  engage  to  prove  to  a  demonstration,  that  the  system  under 
discussion  has  not  wherewith  to  maintain  itself;  that  the  bible 
cannot  be  proved  an  inspired  work — a  supernatural  witness  being 
required  therefor,  which  is  not  admissible  in  the  system — that 
its  canon  we  can  never  be  assured  of,  inasmuch  as  out  of  twelve 


-icQ  THE   KEY  TO   TRUE   CHRISTIANITY. 

gospels  in  use  in  the  fifth  century,  the  Roman  catholic  church 
rejected  eight  ;  out  of  six  Acts  of  the  Apostles  she  rejected  five, 
leaving  us  only  one  ;  out  of  four  Revelations  she  rejected  three ;  in 
a  word,  she  set  aside  no  less  than  forty  scriptures  then  in  use  ;  that 
inasmuch  as  the  system  proposes  to  us  a  code  of  laws  without 
interpreter  or  judge,  thereby  evincing  the  fact,  that  if  this  system 
be  the  one  presented  for  our  acceptance  by  a  divine  Legislator, 
He  displayed  in  this  respect  none  of  the  wisdom  with  which  He 
has  endowed  even  the  semi-civilized  legislators  of  the  earth,  to 
whom  he  has  given  the  foresight  to  see  that  disorder  and  chaos 
would  reign  when  every  subject  or  citizen  had  the  right  to  decide 
and  interpret  definitively  the  genuine  sense  of  the  law  ;  to  appoint 
judges  who,  learned  in  the  law,  interpret  its  true  meaning.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  divine  Legislator,  in  such  premises,  has  ut- 
terly failed  to  foresee  the  lamentable  consequences  that  necessa- 
rily follow  from  a  system  of  legislation  not  only  incomplete,  but  in 
its  immediate  results  productive  of  discord,  wrangling,  uncharita- 
bleness,  etc.,  in  proportion  as  men  seriously  and  heartily  adhere 
to  it ;  whilst,  on  the  other  hand,  to  men  who,  conversant  with 
its  workings,  who  regard  it  with  clear  intellects,  it  begets  only 
indifFerentism  to  all  revealed  religion,  and  consequent  rationalism, 
and  this  deplorable  condition  of  things  is  fast  pervading  our  land. 
Another  fact,  which  is  well  worthy  our  notice,  is  that  Chris- 
tianity had  existed  nearly  fifteen  hundred  years,  during  which 
time  it  was  morally  impossible  for  one  christian  in  ten  thousand 
to  exercise  an  act  of  faith  through  the  scriptures ;  for  from  the 
dawn  of  Christianity  to  the  year  397,  there  was  no  bible,  as  we 
possess  it  to-day,  the  catholic  church  having,  in  the  council  of 
Carthage,  separated  what  she  considered  the  spurious  from  the 
genuine  and  inspired  scriptures,  rejecting  the  greater  part  ;  there- 
fore, for  four  hundred  years  nearly,  no  christian  could  make  an  act 
of  faith  in  the  scriptures.  From  that  period  to  the  discovery  of 
the  art  of  printing,  it  was  nearly  equally  impossible  to  do  so  ;  for 
when  we  consider  the  extreme  difficulty  of  procuring  a  copy  of  the 
scriptures,  occasioned  by  the  mode  of  writing,  which  was  called 
"uncial,"  and  which  consisted  of  detached  letters,  like  our  capi- 
tals on  a  sign-board — the  long  period  thus  necessary  to  copy  a 
whole  bible,  and  the  consequent  high  price  thereof,  let  me  ask,  do 
I  exaggerate  when  I  suggest  that  not  one  man  in  a  hundred  thou- 


THE   KEY  TO   TRUE   CHRISTIANITY.  ^^l 

sand  could  possibly  have  a  copy  of  the  scriptures,  and  consequently 
not  one  man  in  that  number  could  make  an  act  of  faith  in  the  scrip- 
tures ?  Let  me  ask,  can  such  a  system  have  ever  been  intended 
by  God  as  a  means  of  salvation,  which  for  a  period  of  fifteen 
hundred  years  was  practically  a  "sealed  book"  to  mankind?  If 
this  fact  be  not  of  itself  sufficient  to  alarm  those  who,  in  good 
faith  have  hitherto  accepted  this  system,  I  know  not  what  is  ca- 
pable of  so  doing.  It  is  then  conclusive  that  inasmuch  as  Chris- 
tianity flourished  for  fifteen  hundred  years  without  this  system, 
God  never  intended  it  to  christianize  the  world,  apart  from  the 
considerations  already  proposed. 

Having  convinced  myself  of  the  utter  inadequacy  of  the  biblical 
system  to  bring  me  one  step  in  advance,  so  that  I  could  make  an 
act  of  faith  in  a  divine  revelation,  I  naturally  looked  for  some 
other  system  of  Christianity  that  could  satisfy  my  rational  longing 
for  the  supernatural  rather  than  resort  to  rationalism,  into  which 
mankind  in  our  day  are  hastily  rushing.  The  only  system  left 
me  is  that  of  the  Roman  catholic  church.  It  alone  affords  me 
an  escape.  It  presents  me  with  a  supernatural  witness  to  prove 
the  scriptures  inspired — otherwise  unprovable.  It,  claiming  a 
divine  origin,  and  a  perpetual  supervision  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  can 
alone  present  me  unerringly  a  true  canon,  and  as  interpreter, 
judge  and  witness  of  God's  law  to  man,  declares  and  defines,  in 
virtue  of  its  infaUibility — an  absolute  necessity  in  every  system 
of  revealed  religion — the  law  of  the  divine  Legislator. 

LIGHT. 


APPENDIX 


REVIEW  AND  REFUTATION  OF  A  SERMON,  ETC. 


FBSACHED  BY 


Rev.  O.   S.   BARTEN,   D.  D. 

Pastor  of  Christ  Church,  Norfolk,  Va. 


"I  hear  that  some  one  Is  devising  some  folly  regarding  the  holy  and  ever-virgin 
Mary,  and  dares  to  vomit  forth  some  Injurious  fancy  against  her !  Whence  this  wicked 
temper?  Whence  this  great  audacity?.  Does  not  her  very  name  bear  witness  against, 
and  convince  thee,  thou  contentious  man?  Who  was  there  ever,  or  what  age  has  pre- 
sumed to  utter  the  name  of  Mary  the  holy,  and  when  interrogated,  has  not  instantly 
added  in  reply,  "the  Virgin?"  For  in  these  titles  are  shown  forth  the  distinctive 
marks  of  virtue.  And  to  holy  Mary  is  added  the  epithet,  "the  Virgin,"  and  this  shall 
never  be  altered.  For  she,  the  holy,  ever  remained  spotless.  Does  not  nature  itself  in- 
struct thee?  Oh!  the  unheard  of  madness  !  Oh,  sad  novelty  !  How  dare  they  attack 
the  spotless  Virgin  7  She  was  found  worthy  to  be  the  dwelling-place  of  the  Son  ;  she 
who  was,  for  this  very  end,  chosen  from  out  the  thousands  of  Israel  to  be  the  vessel, 
and  the  alone  memorable  dwelling-place  of  the  (divine)  birth." 

St.  Epiphanius,  A.  D.  385. 


NORFOLK,  FEAST  OF  THE  PURIFICATION  OF  B.  V.  MARY,  1874. 
REV.  0.  S.  BARTEN,  D.  D.,  Rector  of  Christ  Church,  Norfolk,  Va. 

Reverend  Sir  :  I  beg  leave  to  call  your  attention  to  the 
subjoined  copy  of  notes,  taken  from  the  original,  verhatijn^  llter^ 
atim^  et  punctuatim^  which  was  handed  me  by  a  friend,  having 
been  addressed  to  him  by  yourself,  and  which  I  now  propose  to 
make  the  subject  of  some  remarks. 

•      ''CHRIST  CHURCH  RECTORY,  NORFOLK,  VA.,  JAN.  5,  1874. 

''The  leading  points  of  the  sermon  you  alluded  to  were,  ist. 
An  examination  of  the  passage  of  Luke,  i  c.  28  v.,  the  much- 
quoted  passage  in  favor  of  adoration.,  &c.,  which  brought  out  the 
fact  that — even  accepting  their  own  translation  (the  Vulgate), 
not  a  word  can  be  found  that  implies  or  teaches  equality  with  the 
Son.  She  was  not  a  fountain  of  grace  to  others  as  was  the  Son. 
Moreover,  it  was  shown  that  expressions,  the  very  same,  or  as 
similar  as  can  well  be  conceived  were  applied  to  many  others  in 
scripture — that  in  fact  not  a  word  is  said  in  that  passage  which 


A  ADOKATION    OF    THE  B.  V.  MAR'X. 

was  in  any  way  peculiar  as  to  her  nature  and  had  not  been  said 
before  or  to  others. 

"  Moreover,  her  consternation  at  the  angel's  message  was 
dwelt  upon  as  another  proof  that  she  herself  did  not  accept  the 
visit  or  anything  connected  with  it  as  an  act  of  adoration.  2d. 
The  historical  account  of  the  gospel  was  dwelt  upon  as  a  proof 
of  her  miraculous  conception  by  and  through  the  overshadowing 
of  the  Holy  Ghost — which  the  angel  in  the  most  reverend  man- 
ner spoke  of  as  a  great  mystery — the  point  here  is,  if  the  Virgin 
had  been  without  sin,  &c.,  then  the  miracle  should  be  dated  back 
to  her  and  her  birth,  and  where  would  the  human  nature  of 
Christ  come  from  ? 

"3d.  Mary's  submission — her  obedience — her  humari Vi2.y  oi 
doing — the  Saviour's  treatment  of  her — the  turning-point  of  their 
relationship  at  Cana — at  the  message  that  she  and  His  brethren 
are  without — the  scene  upon  the  cross  not  my  but  thy  (John's) 
mother  and  to  Mary,  not  mother,  but  woman  behold  thy  son  ! — 
from  which  it  appears  that  Mary  felt  and  was  satisfied  with  the 
transfer  of  natural  relationship  to  the  fullest  apprehension  of  the 
tenderness  and  sacredness  of  the  eternal  tie  which  binds  together 
the  church  and  the  Lord.  Lastly  the  historical  point  that  the 
apostles  in  the  epistles  and  early  fathers  are  all  silent  as  to  the 
Romish  doctrine  with  respect  to  her — not  to  be  supposed  natural 
from  the  importance  which  Romanists  attach  to  it. 

"Also  the  fact  that  the  prayer  now  used  by  the  Romanists — 
Ave  Maria  was  not  used  in  the  church  before  the  13th  century — 
the  latter  clause,  pray  for  me,  not  until  the  15th  and  later.  And 
that  while  it  took  15  centuries  to  develop  the  doctrine,  it  was  not 
promulgated  till  the  19th — moreover  that  at  this  time  thousands 
(over  20  or  30,000)  in  the  last  year  are  absolutely  turning  away 
from  her  altars  because  they  will  and  cannot  accept  the  new 
dogma. 

"  In  haste,  yours, 

«0.  S.  BARTEN." 


Never  have  I,  in  the  course  of  my  life,  discovered  in  so  small 
a  compass,  such  a  combination  of  reckless  assertion,  unpardon- 
able ignorance  of  facts,  theology  and  ecclesiastical  history  than 
is  to  be  found  embodied  in  the  above  summary  ;  and  "  si  hoc  in 
viridi^  quid  in  arido? — if  so  much  be  found  in  the  green  wood, 
wnat  may  we  not  expect  in  the  dry  ?"  that  is,  if  the  synopsis  of 
the  sermon  betray  such  a  lamentable  exhibition  of  uncharitable- 
ness,  misstatement  and  ignorance,  what  must  be  concluded  of 
the  sermon  itself?     You  undertake  to  prove,  by  various  argu- 


ADORATION    OF    THE    B.  V.  MARY.  g 

ments,  that  Romanists  have  no  justification  for  their  adoration  of  the 
Virgin,  Let  me  ask  have  you  carefully  ascertained  whether  they 
adore  her^  in  fact?  If  they  adore  her,  they  are,  necessarily,  idol- 
aters^ because  to  adore  a  creature  Is  pure  Idolatry.  Then,  Inas- 
much, as  I  unworthily  represent  the  catholic  community  of  this 
city,  I  am  the  arch-Idolater  of  Norfolk  !  Oh,  God  !  have  I  lived 
in  this  city  nearly  twenty-two  years,  devoting  myself  ceaselessly 
towards  furthering  Thy  interests  (as  I  vainly  imagined),  in  the 
instruction  of  the  old  and  young,  teaching  them  that  they  must 
adore  one,  true,  living  and  eternal  God,  and  no  more^  as  our 
catechism  teaches,  and  at  this  era  in  my  life  to  be  told  that  I 
represent  an  idolatrous  church — that  my  people  are  adorers  of 
a  mere  creature — that  the  gentle  sisters  of  charity,  who,  in  one 
of  our  Institutions  here  are  devoting  themselves,  night  and  day, 
to  alleviate  the  sufferings  of  poor  humanity,  and  In  the  other,  are 
"  spending  themselves  and  being  spent"  in  protecting  many  of  the 
helpless  orphans  of  our  city,  are  idolaters?  That  the  grant  of 
St.  Vincent's  Hospital,  one  of  the  chief  ornaments  as  well  as 
most  useful  institutions  of  our  city,  was  made  by  an  idolatrous 
lady  and  her  idolatrous  brother,  who,'  raised  a  member  of  the 
church  of  England,  fell  into  the  idolatry  of  his  sister,  and  died 
an  idolater,  having  previously  bequeathed  his  large  estate  to  the 
propagation  of  the  catholic  faith — in  other  words,  to  the  further- 
ance of  idolatrous  interests  ? 

Am  I  to  be  told  that  the  present  archbishop  of  Baltimore,  erst 
an  episcopal  minister,  and  of  course  then  a  simon-pure  christian, 
fell,  like  the  apostate  Julian,  Into  base  Idolatry,  and  is  now,  like 
his  prototype,  devoting  his  energies  to  the  propagation  of  an  Idol- 
atrous worship?  Am  I  to  be  told  that  the  present  archbishop  of 
Westminster,  Dr.  Manning,  once  one  of  the  brightest  ornaments 
of  the  church  of  England,  has  similarly  abandoned  that  pure  (?) 
institution,  to  adore  idols  ?  that  Dr.  Newman,  one  of  the  most 
gifted  men  of  the  age,  with  hundreds  of  his  episcopalian  confreres, 
formerly  ministers  of  that  church,  are  fallen  from  their  high  estate, 
and  now  grovelling  in  the  mire  of  idolatry  ?  Am  I  to  be  told  that 
two  hundred  and  fifty  million  Roman  catholics,  and  from  seventy 
to  eighty  million,  that  compose  the  Greek  church,  are  all  sunk  in 
base  idolatry,  in  conjunction  with  the  other  eastern  sects  that, 
with  the  foregoing,  have  always  held  on  the  same  question  views 


g  ADORATION   OF   THE  B.  V.  MARY. 

perfectly  identical ;  whilst  a  mere  sixth  part  of  so-called  chris- 
tians, the  remnant  of  Christianity,  composed  of  a  conglomera- 
tion of  all  kinds  of  odds  and  ends,  the  debris  of  protestantism,  fast 
dissolving  into  shapeless  fragments,  the  greater  part  of  which  does 
not  believe  in  the  divinity  of  Jesus  Christ,  or  in  a  divine  revela- 
tion ;  ex  gratia^  Prince  Bismarck,  the  Premier  of  Germany,  who 
recently  informed  a  correspondent  of  the  New  York  World  that 
he  recognized  no  God  but  the  state,  and  would  compel  the  empire  to 
adopt  his  own  views ;  and  in  this  particular,  he  will  not  experience 
much  difficulty,  inasmuch  as  the  protestantism  of  Germany  to-day 
is  not  very  far  removed  from  that  desired  point.  And  this,  forsooth, 
is  the  element  that  Christianity  has  to  rely  upon  for  recuperation 
and  restoration  to  that  pure  condition  which  it  enjoyed  in  the 
primitive  ages — an  element  that  cannot  unite  in  making  an  act  of 
faith  in  the  divinity  of  the  Founder  of  Christianity,  or  in  the  exis- 
tence of  a  supernatural  revelation.  Surely  the  age  of  miracles 
must  be  restored  to  us,  in  order  to  enable  this  compound  to  recall 
all  idolatrous  christians,  Romanists,  Greeks,  etc.,  etc.,  to  that 
enviable  (!)  Christianity,  which  they  exult  in  with  such  good 
reason. 

Have  you,  reverend  sir,  weighed  well  the  import  of  the  above 
words,  "  adoration,  equality  with  the  Son,  act  of  adoration,'*  etc., 
etc.  ?  Could  you  possibly  have  offered  a  greater  insult  to  a  chris- 
tian than  to  charge  him  with  idolatry  ?  And  yet  this  is  unequiv- 
ocally true,  if  your  own  handwriting  is  to  be  credited.  In  the 
wantonness  of  spiritual  pride,  you,  on  that  Sunday,  in  the  pres- 
ence of  a  large  number  of  our  fellow  citizens,  thanked  God  that 
you  were  not  as  the  rest  of — so-called  christians,  idolaters.  You 
had  your  publican  realized  in  the  person  of  the  poor  benighted 
papists  who,  in  an  obscure  corner  of  the  city,  in  their  house  of — 
pardon  me,  I  was  about  to  write — God  ;  no,  but  in  their  temple 
of  idolatry,  striking  their  breasts  and,  unconscious  of  the  horrid 
reality  of  their  situation,  asking  God  (!)  in  their  infatuation,  to 
have  mercy  on  them  sinners.  Arrogance  equal  to  this  is  incon- 
ceivable. Did  the  congregation  who  listened  to  this  calumny  on 
so  many  of  their  fellow  citizens,  believe  you  ?  If  so,  from  my 
heart  I  pity  their  credulity,  and  the  situation  in  such  case  would 
warrant  the  conclusion  that  wealth  and  position  are  not  insepa- 
rable from  unpardonable  ignorance,  but  if  they  believed  you  not, 


ADORATION    OF    THE    B,    Y.  MARY.  n 

» 

then  how,  I  ask,  can  they,  hereafter,  trust  utterances  from  such 
a  source  ?  But  I  now  pronounce,  in  the  most  formal  manner, 
the  subject-matter  of  that  sermon  a  foul  libel  on  myself  and  my 
faithful  catholic  children — a  gross  and  unmerited  insult  to  each 
and  every  one  of  us — a  specimen  of  uncharitableness  as  unwar- 
ranted as  vindictive,  and  an  expose  of  ignorance  that  should  raise 
the  blood  to  the  cheek  of  any  half-educated  boor.  I  denounce 
the  above,  every  position,  every  sentence,  word  and  letter  there- 
of, and  publicly  proclaim  that  a  more  wanton  and  unprovoked 
insult  never  before  emanated  from  the  most  irresponsible  source 
to  a  considerable  portion  of  any  community. 

It  is  equally  untrue  as  it  is  insulting,  and  I  shall  now  proceed 
to  establish  this  proposition. 

Alas,  that  in  this  enlightened  age,  and  in  a  city  where  catho- 
licity has  had  a  foothold  for  nearly  a  century,  numbering  in  its 
fold  some  of  the  most  prominent  and  influential  of  its  citizens,  it 
should  be  found  necessary  to  repel  this  gratuitous  insult,  by 
proving  the  charge  a  false  one,  and  that  neither  my  spiritual  chil- 
dren nor  myself  can  be  truthfully  charged  with  the  crime  most 
odious  to  Christianity,  viz. :   idolatry. 

Were  I  not  a  christian  clergyman  I  should  adopt  another  mode 
of  refuting  this  slander. 

Is  it  true,  then,  that  Romanists,  as  you  call  us,  adore  the 
blessed  Virgin  Mary  ?  The  answer  to  this  question  can  be  found 
in  the  defined  teachings  of  the  church,  or  from  the  lips  of  the 
catholic  child,  who  will  tell  you  from  his  catechism,  that  supreme 
and  absolute  homage  belongs  to  God  alone,  whilst  a  relative  or 
inferior  homage  is  allowable  to  be  conferred  on  creatures.  But 
before  the  reply  be  fully  developed,  it  is  better  to  be  explicit  re- 
garding the  terms,  idolatry  and  adoration.  The  word  idolatry, 
etymologically  considered,  is  derived  from  two  Greek  words, 
which  signify  the  supreme  homage  to  an  idol ;  whilst  the  word 
adoration,  from  its  Latin  root,  means  literally  "  the  hand  to  the 
mouth,"  indicative  of  homage.  Whatever  may  have  been  hith- 
erto the  received  acceptation  of  these  words,  it  is  now  beyond  dis- 
pute that  they  are  to-day  synonymous,  should  the  word  adora- 
tion be  applied  to  any  other  being  than  God,  and  involves  the 
crime  conveyed  by  the  word  idolatry,  and  this  is  evidently  your 
idea  of  the  word,  for  you  labor  hard  to  establish  the  fact  that 


g  ADORATION    OF   THE   B.   V.   MARY. 

Mary  is  but  a  creature — a  work  of  supererogation  on  your  part, 
for  the  being  does  not  live  who  ever  regarded  her  otherwise. 
Now  I  shall  proceed  to  the  discussion  of  the  question,  as  to 
whether  catholics  a^iore  the  Blessed  Virgin.  I  reply  with  all  the 
energy  of  my  nature,  that  the  imputation  is  a  foul  calumny,  and 
I  hurl  back  the  slander  in  the  teeth  of  the  libeller  !  But  as  as- 
sertion merely  would  be  of  no  avail  here,  inasmuch  as  I  have  to 
deal  with  those  who  love  to  see  with  bandages  voluntarily  en- 
veloping their  mental  vision  (pardon  the  Hibernicism),  I  propose 
to  develop  the  teachings  of  the  church  on  this  question. 

I  have  been  a  catholic  from  my  infancy,  and  have  devoted  the 
best  part  of  my  life  to  the  instruction  of  others  in  her  teachings ; 
hence  I  deem  myself,  to  say  the  least,  as  correct  an  exponent  of  her 
doctrines  as  any  one  who  never  for  a  moment  obeyed  her  voice. 
Well  do  I  remember  the  question  in  the  catechism,  viz.  :  Does 
this  commandment  (first)  forbid  all  veneration  of  saints  and 
angels  ?  and  its  answer:  No,  provided  we  honor  them  with  an 
inferior  or  relative  honor,  etc. 

To  render  to  God  the  supreme  homage  which  belongs  to  Him 
alone^  is  the  first  lesson  which  the  catholic  church  inculcates  on 
the  tender  minds  of  her  children ;  hence  she  takes  special  care  to 
distinguish  between  the  absolute  and  inalienable  honor  and  hom- 
age due  to  the  Deity  and  the  honor  accorded  to  creatnres  ;  thus 
distinguishing  in  the  genus  honor  two  species  :  Latria,  which  be- 
longs to  God  alone,  and  is  absolute,  whilst  the  second  species, 
which  is  rendered  to  creatures  in  the  natural  or  supernatural 
order  is  called  Dulia,  or  inferior  and  relative  honor.  This 
distinction  is  so  well  delineated  that  it  is  impossible  to  con- 
found one  with  the  other;  for  to  God  alone  belongs  Latria,  or 
supreme  homage,  which  chiefly  finds  expression  in  sacrifice, 
which  can  be  offered  to  Him  alone,  and  which  has  been  offered 
to  Him  alone  by  all  true  believers  from  the  creation  of  the  worW 
— in  the  old  law,  through  the  medium  of  types  and  figures,  and 
in  the  new  dispensation  by  the  sacrifice  of  the  cross  ever  abiding 
amongst  us  in  its  continuation  by  the  arrangement  of  Jesus  Christ 
Himself,  who  is  "a  Priest  forever  according  to  the  order  of  Mel- 
chisidech,"  viz.,  by  off'ering  the  "  clean  oblation,"  alone  accept- 
able to  God,  viz..  Himself,  under  the  forms  of  bread  and  wine, 
and  this  "  forever,"  through   the  medium  of  the  priests  of  the 


ADORATION    OF   THE    B.  V.  MARY.  ft 

new  law,  who  were  commanded  to  "  do  this  in  remembrance  of 
Him."  This  is  Latria,  in  its  highest  and  supreme  expression,  and 
this,  reverend  sir,  you  never  yet  offered  to  God,  but,  dog-in-the- 
manger-like,  you  will  not  ofFer  it  yourself  nor  allow  it  to  be 
ofiered,  if  you  can  help  it.  This  is  the  realization  of  all  the 
sacrificial  figures,  "offered  from  the  rising  of  the  sun  to  the  going 
down  thereof;"  and  in  every  place  "there  is  sacrifice  and  a  clean 
oblation,"  verifying  literally  the  grand  prophecy  of  Malachy. 
This  is  Latria  in  all  its  plenitude,  the  absence  of  which,  in  pro- 
testantism, exhibits  it  as  the  only  profession  of  religion  on  earth 
which  does  not  offer  to  God  supreme  honor  or  sacrifice,  whilst 
yet  it  recognizes  His  supreme  Majesty.  For  from  the  com- 
mencement of  the  world  to  this  day,  protestantism  stands  isolated 
as  a  system  of  religion  presenting  the  anomaly  of  the  worship  of 
God  without  sacrifice.  To  resume,  the  second  species  of  honor, 
called  Dulia,  is  confined  to  created  beings,  but  always  referable 
to  God,  according  to  the  psalmist,  "  Laudate  Dominum  in  Sanctis 
ejus'' — "Praise  ye  the  Lord  in  His  saints;"  for  all  the  honor  con- 
ferred on  the  saints  redounds  to  the  honor  of  God,  and  it  is  to  be 
referred  to  Him — the  Holy  Ghost  commanding  it  in  the  above 
express  terms.  Moreover,  what  are  the  saints  of  God  but  His 
creatures  who  are  now^  by  His  bounty,  enjoying  the  beatific 
vision,  because  he  chooses  to  confer  on  them  His  gifts,  and  in 
praising,  honoring  and  venerating  them  we  but  co-operate  with 
God  in  His  acts,  and  but  imitate  His  example,  who  commands  it 
as  above  in  the  royal  psalmist.  He  also  commands  us  to  honor 
our  parents,  and,  indirectly,  all  superiors ;  and,  in  fact,  is  not 
every  creature  of  God  worthy  of  honor,  because  it  is  the  creation 
of  God?  Is  not  the  grain  of  sand,  one  of  the  least  of  God's  crea- 
tions, deserving  of  our  respect  because  it  is  His  handiwork  pro- 
duced from  nothing — a  standing  miracle  of  His  omnipotence  ? 
For  who  shall  seek  to  emulate  God  even  in  this  ?  His  own, 
even  his  inanimate  works  serve  to  magnify  His  glory,  and  why 
not  the  rational  being,  in  contemplating  respectfully  the  creations 
of  God,  tender  to  Him  the  homage  of  rational  praise  ?  and  if 
rational  to  do  so  in  the  natural  order,  how  much  more  so  in  His 
higher  works,  viz.,  the  works  of  the  supernatural  order,  wherein 
God's  magnificence  is  more  conspicuously  mirrored,  inasmuch  as 
in    rewarding   His    saints  He  is  but   crowning   His   own  gifts  ? 


J^Q  ADORATION   OF   THK    B.  V.   MARY. 

If  then  the  lower  creations  of  God  challenge  our  respect,  because 
they  are  His  works,  why  not,  a  fortiori^  bestow  our  respect,  honor 
and  veneration  on  the  grandest  of  His  works,  in  which  act  He 
Himself  forestalls  us  ?  Is  the  astronomer  or  star-gazer  who 
poetically  portrays  the  music  of  the  spheres,  and  by  his  word- 
painting  carries  our  imagination  captive  whilst  beguiling  us  to 
accompany  him,  in  spirit,  in  the  midst  of  the  systems  of  suns  and 
their  revolving  planets,  to  receive  the  homage  and  applause  of 
mankind,  whilst  he  has  not  a  word  of  praise  for  the  Author  of 
these  works,  whilst  the  intelligent  and  supernatural  works  of  God, 
immeasurably  above  these  inanimate  creations,  and  which  God 
Himself  ceases  not  to  honor  and  glorify,  must  not  be  honored 
nor  venerated,  although  such  honor  and  veneration  is  intended  to 
redound  to  the  glory  of  God,  by  those  who  offer  it  ? 

Now  the  catholic  church  in  honoring  with  the  relative  or 
second  species  of  honor  called  Dulia,  the  saints  of  God,  is  but 
honoring  God  in  His  gifts,  whilst  she,  at  the  same  time,  compre- 
hends in  this  species  of  honor  every  creature  of  God,  from  the 
grain  of  sand  to  the  most  exalted  of  the  supernatural  creations. 
But  the  distance  observed  by  her  between  this  honor  and  Latria 
is  simply  infinite^  as  infinite  as  the  distance  between  the  Creator 
and  His  creatures.  Adoration,  or  Latria,  is  the  exclusive  tribute 
of  homage  to  God,  whilst  all  creatures,  because  they  are  God^s 
works^  receive,  according  to  her  teaching,  what  she  calls  Dulia, 
viz. :  a  relative  honor  referable  to  God,  who  is  thus  honored  in 
His  works.  The  line  of  demarcation  is  therefore  discernible 
between  the  two,  beyond  all  possibility  of  error,  except  to  those 
who  will  not  see,  because  the  fond  dream  of  imputing  idolatry  to 
these  papists,  from  our  pulpits,  is  so  refreshing  a  theme  to  descant 
on,  and  one  hates  so  to  have  his  eyes  opened  to  the  destruction 
of  so  pleasant  a  vision,  by  the  knowledge  of  the  truth.  I  give 
Thee  thanks,  O  God,  that  I  am  not  as  the  rest  of — christians, 
an  idolater. 

To  resume,  the  conferring  of  Latria,  or  supreme  homage,  on 
any  created  being,  howsoever  elevated  by  the  bounty  of  God, 
would  be  idolatry,  and,  a  fortiori^  a  similar  honor  or  homage  to 
any  image  or  picture,  even  of  God  Himself.  No  doubt,  reverend 
sir,  you  indulged  your  hearers  with  the  frequent  repetition  of  the 
term  "  Mariolatry"  in  that  sermon  j  if  so,  and  you  imputed  La- 


ADORATION    OF    THE    B.   V.    MARY.  11 

tria  or  supreme  homage  by  catholics  to  Mary  (for  such  Is  the  im- 
port of  the  word,  and  such  certainly  the  import  of  your  language 
as  quoted  above),  you  have  perpetrated  on  us  as  gross  and  insult- 
ing a  misrepresentation  as  was  ever  unjustifiably  fastened  on  a 
human  being. 

The  distinction  made  by  us  was  made  first  by  God  Himself 
when  He  ordered  us  to  honor  our  father  and  mother,  and  in 
countless  other  places  of  holy  writ  He  enjoins  us  to  honor  crea- 
tures ;  and  the  failure  to  make  that  simple  distinction  involves 
you  in  a  labyrinth  from  the  mazes  of  which  you  can  see  only 
idolatry  and  Mariolatry. 

But,  you  will  ask,  do  not  catholics  render  to  A4ary  an  honor 
above  all  other  creatures  ?  Unquestionably  we  do,  but  yet  we 
honor  her  only  as  a  creature.  Does  it  follow  because  the  soul 
of  the  Southern  soldier  was  fired  with  enthusiasm  by  the  contem- 
plation of  the  meteoric  splendor  of  Jackson's  genius,  he  followed 
less  confidently  the  orders  of  the  mighty  chieftain  whose  eagle 
glance  developed  almost  intuitively,  combmations  that  embraced 
the  weakness  and  strength  of  armies,  positions,  localities  and 
countless  circumstances  that  are  more  or  less  concomitant  with, 
or  consequent  upon  warfare  ?  By  no  means  ;  nor  does  it  follow 
because  we  may  be  enraptured  with  the  zeal  and  superhuman 
energy  manifested  by  the  apostles  after  they  had  begun  to  preach 
the  gospel,  or  followed  them  in  their  self-sacrificing  spirit  even 
to  the  shedding  of  their  blood — it  follows  not  by  any  means  that 
we  have  ceased  to  admire,  to  venerate,  and  love  with  an  all- 
absorbing  tenderness  her  who,  at  the  voice  of  the  angel  indicating 
the  will  of  the  Deity,  voluntarily  placed  her  life  and  all,  at  the 
service  of  the  Divinity  that  man  might  have  a  Redeemer,  and 
whose  life  ever  after,  for  thirty-three  years,  was  one  of  self- 
sacrifice  and  terrible  suspense,  predicted  in  the  warnings  of  the 
aged  Simeon,  "  that  a  sword  should  pierce  her  soul." 

Mary's  sacrifice  for  man  is  one  that  should  beget  in  the  chris- 
tian soul  a  feeling  of  indebtedness  to  her  that  should  never  cease, 
for  not  all  the  sacrifices  and  trials  of  all  the  chosen  servants  of 
God  can  compare  with  the  all-important  rdle  she  represented  in 
the  work  of  redemption. 

Catholics,  in  honoring  the  least  of  God's  creatures  in  the  natu- 
ral order,  to  the  noblest  in  the  supernatural,  are,  therefore,  but 


j|^2  ADORATION   OF   THE   B.  V.   MARY. 

acting  as  rational  beings — for  every  creature  of  God,  even  the 
least,  challenges  the  admiration  of  the  reflecting  rational  man, 
and  as  we  advance  in  the  scale  of  creatures  our  admiration  and 
respect  for  God  and  the  works  of  God  are  enhanced  proportion- 
ately to  their  excellence,  until  our  faith  conducts  us  into  the  abode 
of  God  Himself,  so  that,  by  the  light  of  revelation,  we  are  lost 
in  admiration  of  God's  honored  creatures  there,  and  overwhelmed 
by  the  anticipation  of  the  majesty  of  God  Himself,  whose  power, 
grandeur  and  magnificence  are  so  admirably  mirrored  in  these  His 
most  favored  and  honored  creatures.  And  who  are  these  creatures 
upon  whom  God  loves  to  bestow  thus  His  bounties  ?  They  are 
His  angels  and  saints  ;  they  are  those  of  whom  St.  Paul  says  that 
"  eye  hath  never  seen,  nor  ear  heard,  nor  the  heart  of  man  been 
able  to  conceive"  the  happiness  that  they  enjoy.  And  who  is 
the  Being  whom  all  the  denizens  of  heaven  adore,  invested  with 
a  body  and  soul  like  ours,  but  resplendent  with  the  effulgence  of 
the  Deity  ?  This  is  the  Man-God — the  second  Person  of  the 
Holy  Trinity ;  our  Redeemer ;  our  Adorable  Benefactor — whose 
praises  the  saints  before  the  throne  cease  not  to  sing,  because 
they  owe  all  their  happiness  to  His  infinite  love.  The  Incarnate 
God  is  "their  God  and  their  All."  But  whence  that  flesh 
through  which  the  Divinity  manifests  Himself,  filling  Heaven 
itself  with  the  magnificence  of  Deified  Humanity  ?  It  was  given 
him  for  the  salvation  of  these  saints  by  that  Queen  of  Saints  who 
is,  forever,  the  connecting-link  between  the  Divinity  and  them. 
It  is  "  the  flesh  of  her  flesh  and  the  bone  of  her  bone"  that  con- 
stitutes the  glorified  body  of  the  saints'  Redeemer.  And  if  the 
treasure  of  eternal  happiness  which  they  now  exult  in,  challenges 
the  ceaseless  gratitude  of  their  being  towards  the  God-man,  can 
it  be  possible  that  their  purified  nature  could  for  a  moment  per- 
mit them  to  ignore  the  debt  of  gratitude  they  owe  her  who  gave 
Him  that  glorified  body — who  was  as  truly  His  mother  as  any 
parent  could  possibly  be,  and  who  of  all  beings  that  ever  lived 
could,  without  idolatry,  adore  the  child  of  her  womb  ?  Think 
you  that  that  Son  who  left  us  all  a  positive  command  to  honor 
our  parents,  could  Himself  be  to  us  an  example  of  disrespect  to- 
wards His  parent,  as  His  and  her  enemies  would  have  us  believe? 
Think  you  that  the  Father  and  Holy  Ghost  who  sought  her 
co-operation  when  putting  into  execution  the  grand  scheme  of 


ADORATION    OF   THE   B.  V.  MARY.  ^3 

man's  redemption  and  who  behold  the  Divine  Son  clothed  in 
glorified  humanity,  fail  to  recognize  in  her  the  relation  she  bears 
to  the  Holy  Trinity — infinitely  distant  from  the  Triune  God  as 
a  creature ;  but  nearest  of  all  creatures  through  the  tie  of  consan- 
guinity to  the  Divine  Son  ?  Can  it  be  possible  that  St.  Eliza- 
beth, the  Mother  of  the  Baptist,  forgets,  in  the  court  of  heaven, 
the  vi^ord  she  uttered  under  the  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  as 
recorded  by  St.  Luke  ?  "  Whence  is  this  to  me  that  the  mother 
of  my  Lord  cometh  to  me  ?"  Has  the  Holy  Spirit  also  forgotten 
the  same  expression  which  He  then  placed  on  the  lips  of  Eliza- 
beth ?  If  so,  if  it  can  be  said  without  blasphemy,  "  quantum 
mutatus  ah  illo  /"  Has  she,  by  any  act  of  hers,  forfeited  the  high 
esteem  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  with  which,  too.  He  filled  the 
heart  of  Elizabeth  ?  Or  rather,  is  it  not  utterly  repugnant  to 
reason  not  to  conclude  that  inasmuch  is  the  Father  and  Holy 
Ghost  co-operated  in  so  effectual  a  manner  in  creating  this  won- 
derful vessel  of  election  that  was  to  be  so  potent  an  instrument 
in  man's  salvation,  worthy  in  every  respect  to  fill  the  high  office 
for  which  she  was  created  ;  is  it  not,  I  say,  utterly  repugnant  to 
reason  not  to  conclude,  that  inasmuch  as  they  created  her  with 
all  the  perfection  and  excellence  of  soul  and  body  of  which  a 
human  being  is  capable  (less  than  this  would  have  been  unworthy 
the  dignity  of  the  Divine  Son),  to  render  her  a  habitation  worthy 
of  Him  whom  the  heavens  cannot  contain,  that  the  Divinity  in 
crowning  His  own  gifts  in  the  happiness  of  the  saints,  crowns  in 
an  especial  manner,  this,  the  most  beautiful  of  his  creations,  in  a 
manner  worthy  of  God  Himself — to  honor  the  human  nature  of 
the  Divine  Son,  in  honoring,  conformably  to  her  dignity,  His 
mother  ? 

In  a  word,  what  shall  I  say  of  the  angels  of  God — one  of 
whose  number  was  chosen  to  be  the  messenger  of  the  grand 
tidings  to  mankind,  and  who  was  commissioned  by  the  Godhead 
to  address  her  as  "  full  of  grace" — who,  on  the  night  of  the  babe's 
birth,  sang  "glory  to  God  in  the  highest,"  &c.,  and  who  could 
not  possibly  ignore  the  important  r6le  assumed  by  the  being  that, 
that  night,  gave  salvation  to  the  earth  ?  How  can  they  who  love 
their  fellow-adorers  of  the  Divinity  with  all  the  ardor  of  their 
exalted  nature,  overlook  her  that  so  potently  aided  in  filling 
heaven  with  the   multitude   of    saints   that  are  hourly  taking 


14  ADORATION   OF    THE  B.  V.MARY. 

their  place  in  the  celestial  choirs  ?  But  what  tongue  can  begin 
to  portray  the  all-absorbing,  ever-augmenting,  soul-filling  grati- 
tude that  ever  inflames  the  saints  of  God  toward  her  that  gave 
to  the  world  her  Son  who  redeemed  them,  and  who  now  inebri- 
ates them  with  happiness  unspeakable  ;  how,  I  ask,  is  it  possible 
for  them  to  adequately  testify  their  gratitude  towards  her,  for  her 
part  in  their  present  bliss  ?  How  can  they  adore  their  Redeemer 
in  His  glorified  body  without  having  her  before  their  souls  ?  How 
med'tate  on  the  grand  mystery  of  their  redemption  and  ignore  her 
and  her  part  in  the  work  ?  No  !  a  thousand  times  No  !  As 
well  might  you  seek  t<5  ignore  the  humanity  of  Jesus  Christ  in 
the  work  of  man's  redemption  as  to  persuade  the  beatified  who 
are  ceaselessly  pouring  forth  their  gratitude  to  their  Redeemer, 
that  they  owe  nothing  to  Mary,  although  their  souls  are  ever 
turned  toward?  that  adorable  body  which  she  gave  Him.  In  a 
word,  the  Godhead  honors  Mary  as  the  most  beloved  daughter 
of  the  Father,  as  the  Immaculate  Mother  of  the  Son,  and  as  the 
chaste  spouse  of  the  Holy  Spirit — created  by  Him  as  the  first  and 
grandest  of  His  creatures — incomparably  exalted  above  all  the 
beatified — highest,  grandest,  noblest  work  of  the  Creator,  but  yet 
infinitely  beneath  the  Divinity ;  between  whom  and  her  a  chasm 
infinitely  deep,  wide  and  long  must  in  the  nature  of  things  ever 
exist.  It  is  impossible  for  us  whilst  yet  in  the  bonds  of  the  flesh 
to  appreciate,  at  all  adequately,  the  exalted  and  prominent  posi- 
tion accorded  to  Mary  by  the  Divinity  and  His  adorers  in  heaven. 
Yet  on  earth,  notwithstanding  the  words  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
"  Blessed  art  thou  amongst  women  "  and  "  Behold,  from  hence- 
forth all  generations  shall  call  me  blessed,"  reformed  Christian- 
ity assumes  to  itself  the  ofiice  of  ridiculing  every  claim  which 
faith  in  the  words  of  the  Holy  Spirit  and  right  reason  would  as- 
sert for  her.  Blessed  among  women  !  rather  would  they  abstract 
from  the  sacred  record  every  vestige  of  her  connection  with  the 
redemption.  Blessed  among  women  !  why  should  that  be,  see- 
ing that  her  Son  manifested,  according  to  the  above  copy  of 
notes,  the  sheerest  contempt  for  her,  at  the  marriage-feast  of 
Cana,  and  did  He  not  dissolve  the  eternal  tie  that  naturally 
should  have  always  existed  between  Him  and  her  ?  Did  he  not 
utterly  ignore  her,  when  told  that  she  and  His  brethren  were 
without  ?    And  although  by  her  lips  the  Holy  Ghost  declared  that 


ADORATIOr^    OF   THE    B.  V.  MARY.  ^5 

all  generations  shall  call  her  blessed  henceforth,  who  is  now  so 
simple  as  to  admit  any  such  nonsense,  even  though  the  Holy 
Spirit  prophesied  it  and  declared  it  should  be  realized  ?  Reformed 
Christianity  is  too  keenly  sensitive,  too  tender  and  solicitous  for  the 
honor  due  to  God,  to  tolerate  for  a  moment  the  verification  of  the 
promise  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  It  sees  in  the  Redeemer  a  disrespect- 
ful child,  one  who  was  only  too  willing  to  ignore  all  filial  deco- 
rum, and  who  did,  at  last,  succeed  in  ridding  Himself,  before  the 
world  of  the  incubus  of  a  mother,  by  palming  her  off  on  John, 
"thus  forever  dissolving  the  natural  relation  of  son  and  mother,'' 
and  in  this  unfilial,  indecorous,  disobedient  course  of  conduct, 
He  had  the  unqualified  approbation  of  reformed  Christianity  !  ! ! 

In  this  connection,  reverend  sir,  I  cannot  pass  over  a  remark 
of  yours,  viz.:  "Lastly,  the  historical  point,  that  the  apostles 
in  the  epistles  and  early  fathers  are  all  silent  as  to  the  Romish 
doctrine  with  respect  to  her."  I  do  not  wonder  that  we  should 
find  the  apostles  and  early  fathers  all  silent  on  the  adoration  of  the 
Blessed  Virgin^  a  fancy  existing  only  in  the  bigotted  and  wilfully 
ignorant  brains  of  silly  dolts.  But  that  the  early  fathers  are  all 
silent  as  regards  the  highest  veneration,  honor  and  invocation  of 
her,  would  be  a  hazardous  assertion,  which  the  following  quota- 
tions from  their  writings  will  superabundantly  contradict.  The 
books  of  homilies  authorized  by  your  35th  article,  state  that  the 
church  was  pure  during  the  four  first  centuries.  I  shall  confine 
myself  to  extracts  from  the  fathers  of  these  four  centuries,  and  allow 
you  to  judge,  whether  the  teaching  of  the  catholic  church  to-day 
(as  I  have  truthfully^  not  as  you  have,  it  is  to  be  hoped,  ignorantly, 
rather  than  maliciously,  represented  it)  is  not  more  in  accord 
with  the  teachings  of  the  primitive  church,  than  the  position  of 
reformed  Christianity,  to  decry  the  least  demonstration  of  respect 
for  her,  whether  tendered  by  her  divine  Son,  or  others.  I  shall 
quote  them  indiscriminately,  the  only  difiiculty  being  the  selec- 
tion of  a  few  out  of  the  overwhelming  superabundance,  did  space 
permit  me  to  present  more.  St.  Augustine  says  of  her,  Etiamsi, 
etc.,  "All  the  tongues  of  men,  even  if  all  their  members  were 
changed  to  tongues,  would  be  insufficient  to  praise  her  as  she 
deserves."  I  believe  your  sect  affects  some  respect  for  St.  Au- 
gustine ;  can  you  do  so  after  such  language  ?  How  silent  he  is 
on  the  dignity  of  Mary  !      Hear  him  again  :   "  She  became  also 


|g  ADORATION    OF    THE    B.    V.    MARY. 

by  this  co-operation  the  spiritual  mother  of  us  all,  who  are  mem- 
bers of  one  Head,  Jesus  Christ,"  De  Virg.  Again,  addressing 
her  in  his  sermon,  De  Sanctis,  says:  "Thou  art  the  only  hope 
of  sinners,  because  through  thee  we  hope  for  the  remission  of 
our  sins."  And  what  shall  I  say  of  the  beautiful  apostrophe  of 
the  same  saint :  ^'^ Memorari  O  piissima  V'lrgo^''  "  Remember,  O 
most  pious  Virgin,  that  it  is  unheard-of  that  any  one  fleeing  to  thy 
protection  was  lost  ?"  Does  the  assertion,  that  "  it  is  unheard-of," 
indicate  a  new  doctrine,  or  does  it  not  rather  imply  the  existence 
of  an  old  practical  one  ?  Again  he  says,  Caro  Christi,  etc.  : 
"  The  flesh  of  Christ  is  the  flesh  of  Mary."  Hear  St.  Athana- 
sius  (forty  years  before  Augustine),  and  the  reputed  author 
of  that  creed,  entitled  the  Athanasian  :  "  If  the  Son  is  King,  His 
mother  must  necessarily  be  considered  and  entitled  queen," 
Serm.  de  Desp.  Here  is  rank  popery  for  you  in  the  year  362  ! 
What  do  you  think  of  St.  Ambrose,  after  the  following  ?  "  Al- 
though in  the  pure  womb  of  Mary  there  was  only  one  grain  of 
wheat,  Jesus  Christ,  yet  it  is  called  a  heap  of  grain,  because  in 
that  one  grain  were  contained  all  the  elect,  of  whom  Mary  was 
to  be  the  mother,"  De  Insti.  Virg.  Again,  De  In.  Virg.:  "  Oh 
the  riches  of  Mary's  virginity  !  like  a  cloud,  she  rained  upon  the 
earth  the  grace  of  Christ,  for  concerning  her  was  it  written : 
Behold,  the  Lord  cometh,  sitting  upon  a  light  cloud  (Is.  19  c.), 
truly  light,  she  knew  not  the  burdens  of  wedlock ;  truly  light, 
she  who  lightened  the  world  from  the  heavy  debt  of  sin.  She 
was  light  who  bore  in  her  womb  the  remission  of  sins.' 
How  profoundly  silent  on  the  prerogatives  of  the  blessed  Virgin 
was  St.  Ambrose,  who,  under  God,  gave  the  great  Augustine  to 
Christianity!  St.  Ignatius  (martyr),  A.  D.,  107,  says  of  her: 
"  Mary  is  always  more  loving  than  her  lovers."  Was  he,  living 
in  almost  apostolic  days,  silent  of  Mary  ?  St.  John  Chrysostom 
says,  "  Through  her  we  obtain  pardon  of  our  sins."  St.  Jerome, 
Ep.  ad  Eustachiam,  "  The  blessed  Virgin  not  only  assists,  but 
hastens  to  meet  the  dying."  What  a  profound  silence  does  not 
he  maintain?  Hear  SS.  Ephrim,  the  oldest  father  and  writer  of 
the  oriental  church,  and  Basil,  before  Jerome :  "  Hail !  hope 
of  the  soul,"  says  St.  Ephrim;  again.  In  Parvenes,  "To  thee, 
O  Lord,  together  with  an  odor  of  sweetness,  do  we  offer  the 
merits  of  the  most  blessed  Virgin  Mary."     And  St.  Basil  calls 


ADORATION    OF    THE    B.    V.  MARY.  jy 

her,  "after  God,  our  only  hope,"  Post  Deum  sola  spes  nostra. 
Again,  addressing  the  sinner,  he  says :  "  O  sinner !  be  not 
timid,  but,  in  all  thy  necessities,  flee  to  Mary  ;  invoke  her 
aid,  and  thou  wilt  always  find  her  ready  to  assist  thee,  for 
it  is  the  divine  will  that  she  should  aid  all  in  their  neces- 
sities," De  Laudibus  Virg.  Once  more,  St.  Ephrim :  "  We 
fly  to  thy  patronage,  holy  mother  of  God  ;  protect  and  guard 
us  under  the  wings  of  thy  mercy  and  kindness.  Most  mer- 
ciful God  !  through  the  intercession  of  the  most  blessed  Virgin 
Mary,  and  of  all  the  angels  and  of  all  the  saints,  show  pity  to  thy 
creature."  How  often  has  not  the  last  extract  from  his  Sermon 
de  Laud.  Maria;  Virg.  been  quoted  from  our  prayer-books  as  an 
unerring  proof  of  our  worship  of  her  !  yet  see  the  source  whence 
the  church  borrowed  it,  viz.:  from  the  writings  of  the  oldest 
Greek  father,  although  we  were  told  that  the  fathers  were  all 
silent  on  this  question.  Were  I  to  quote  others  from  this  ancient 
father,  I  would  exceed  the  limits  appropriate  to  this  letter,  and 
would  compel  the  conclusion,  that  had  St.  Ephrim  hved  in  our 
day,  he  would  be  regarded  as  the  lankest  idolater  living.  Let 
me  trespass  once  more  on  my  space  by  a  short  quotation  ;  ad- 
dressing the  blessed  Virgin,  he  says  :  "After  the  Trinity  (thou 
art)  mistress  of  all ;  after  the  Paraclete,  another  paraclete  ;  after 
the  Mediator,  mediatrix  of  the  whole  world."  I  will  now  con- 
clude my  refutation  of  the  charge  of  silence  on  the  part  of  the 
early  fathers,  by  referring  to  the  text  from  St.  Epiphanius,  at  the 
head  of  this  letter,  and  at  the  same  time  inviting  the  testimony 
of  the  same  holy  father  to  the  perfect  identity  that  exists  between 
the  doctrine  of  his  day  and  ours.  No  one  will  question  his  devo- 
tion to  Mary,  after  reading  that  text,  any  more  than  mine  to  her 
on  reading  this  letter,  but  as  no  one  would  be  found  more  deter- 
mined' in  his  protest  against  any  innovation  on  the  teachings  of 
the  church,  by  rendering  to  Mary  the  least  portion  of  the  homage 
that  belongs  exclusively  to  the  Divinity,  so  likewise  we  find, 
that  when  the  Collyridian  heresy  made  Its  appearance — a  heresy 
which  gave  to  Mary  the  homage  that  was  God's  exclusively,  this 
grand  champion  of  primitive  Christianity,  and  of  the  honor  due 
to  God's  mother,  at  once  rushed  to  the  rescue  of  catholic  truth 
by  trampling  under  foot  the  innovation,  and  in  this  every  catho- 
lic   on    earth,  with    myself,    would    Imitate    him.     Hear  him : 


18  ADORATION   OF   THE   B.  V.   MARY. 

*'  Though,  therefore,  she  was  a  chosen  vessel,  and  endowed  with 
eminent  sanctity,  still  she  is  a  woman,  partaking  of  our  common 
nature,  but  deserving  of  the  highest  honors  shown  to  the  saints 
of  God.  She  stands  before  them  all,  on  account  of  the  heavenly 
mystery  accomplished  in  her.  But  we  adore  no  saint ;  and  as 
this  worship  is  not  given  to  angels,  much  less  can  it  be  allowed 
to  the  daughter  of  Ann.  Let  Mary  then  be  honored  ;  but  let 
the  Father,  Son  and  Holy  Ghost  alone  be  adored;  let  no  one  adore 
Mary^  Comment  here  would  but  serve  to  dim  the  brightness. 
If,  therefore,  the  catholic  church  of  to-day  is  guilty  of  idolatry, 
then  the  primitive  church,  in  the  second,  third  and  fourth  centu- 
ries, in  Greece,  in  Syria,  Mesopotamia,  Italy,  etc.,  etc.,  was 
plunged  into  deeper  idolatry  than  we  of  to-day  are,  consequently 
the  church  of  England,  which  in  her  books  of  homilies  claims 
purity  of  doctrine  for  the  primitive  church,  was  guilty  of  a  most 
egregious  falsehood. 

Now,  reverend  sir,  with  the  above  array  of  testimony  staring 
you  in  the  face  (the  want  of  space  alone  preventing  the  list  of 
quotations  being  doubled  or  quadrupled),  will  you,  I  ask,  ever 
again  ''  bear  false  witness "  against  that  church  that  has,  ages 
ago,  placed  the  seal  of  her  condemnation  on  the  very  error  that 
you  so  falsely  attribute  to  her  in  the  nineteenth  century  ?  Be- 
hold how,  whilst  the  fathers  of  that  pure  and  undefiled  church, 
of  the  four  first  centuries,  testify  to  the  honor  that  was  conferred 
on  the  virgin  mother  of  God,  and  in  the  same  breath  testify  to 
her  promptitude  in  condemning  a  heresv  which  you  so  truthfully? 
impute  to  her,  and  which  she  so  long  ago  stamped  with  her  ana- 
themas ! 

Dismissing  now  the  charge  of  adoration  of  a  creature,  and  its 
necessary  and  immediate  inference,  idolatry,  I  proceed  to  offer  a 
itsN  remarks  on  the  remaining  portion  of  your  notes.  In  your 
second  point,  you  remark  :  "  The  point  here  is,  if  the  Virgin, 
etc.,  etc.,  and  where  would  the  human  nature  of  Christ  come 
from  ?"  I  ask,  is  it  possible,  that  any  one  in  his  senses  could 
conclude  that  the  blessed  Virgin  or  any  other  being  could  not  gen- 
erate unless  born  in  original  sin  ?  If  so,  then  alas  for  your  pros- 
pects and  mine  of  existence  had  not  Eve  eaten  the  apple.  Was  not 
Eve  created  immaculate,  and  were  not  she  and  her  husband  or- 
dered to  "  increase  and  multiply  .?"     Alas  for  the  philosophy  and 


/■ 


AEOKATION   OF   THE  B.  V.   MARY.  ^9 

theology  that  form  the  basis  of  such  a  conclusion.  1  would  re- 
commend the  application  for  the  patent-right  of  that  discovery. 

Third.  "  Mary's  submission,  etc.,  the  Saviour's  treatment 
of  her,"  etc.  The  wilful  blindness  that  seeks  to  place  in  the 
strongest  light  possible,  the  would-be  instances  of  disrespect  man- 
ifested by  Jesus  Christ  to  His  mother,  is  to  me  incomprehensi- 
ble. Alas  for  the  man  who,  to  gratify  his  prejudice,  would  fain 
make  the  Son  of  God  guilty  of  that  which  never  fails  to  bring 
down  the  vengeance  of  heaven  !  I  always  thought  that  Jesus 
came  not  to  destroy  but  to  fulfil  the  law.  Now,  one  of  the 
most  emphatic  precepts  of  that  law  is  to  "  honor  thy  father  and 
mother,"  and  does  not  the  scripture  say  that  He  went  down  to 
Nazareth,  and  was  subject  to  them,  /.  ^.,  to  Mary  and  Joseph  ? 
And  yet  a  sect  of  Christianity  in  the  nineteenth  century  glories 
in  discovering  in  the  Saviour  a  divine  Model  of  disobedience !!! 
May  God  pity  the  blindness  that  would  pique  itself  on  such  a 
discovery  as  this,  which  amounts  to  blasphemy !  I  sincerely 
hope  you  will  begin  to  think  better  of  Him  as  a  Son,  before  you 
again  present  Him  as  a  model  to  Christian  children. 

But  how  can  the  christian  world  ever  do  you,  reverend  sir,  ad- 
equate honor  for  the  all-important  discovery  of  "  the  transfer  of 
natural  relationship,  etc.,  and  Mary's  satisfaction"  thereat? 
Well  may  you  say,  with  the  poet,  ^^Exigi  monumentum  acre  per- 
enjiius  /"  Be  these  the  spiritual  rations  whereon  your  children 
are  fed  ?  So  St.  John  became  her  child  in  the  natural  order  1 
Nicodemus'  question,  Must  a  man  go  back  to  his  mother's 
womb  ?  could  not  hold  a  light  to  that  assertion.  John  it  was, 
then,  whom  she  conceived  in  her  womb,  whom  she  loved  as  her 
son  and  adored  as  her  God  for  thirty-three  years,  and  who,  up 
to  and  after  this  speech  was  ever  and  always  her  son,  and  when 
that  body  was  taken  down  from  the  cross,  and  when  she  received 
it  into  her  arms,  it  was  not  the  body  she  gave  Him  ;  the  secret 
was  (and  it  was  never  discovered  until  December,  1878)  that 
Mary  and  John's  mother  had  exchanged  children  in  the  infancy 
of  the  children,  and  this  furnishes  the  key  to  His  ignoring  of  His 
reputed  mother  on  all  occasions.  What  an  error  the  poor  woman 
labored  under,  or  rather  made  it  appear  that  she  labored  under, 
during   His  whole   life.      And   what    a   blunder    St.   Augustine 


20  ADORATIOX    OF    THE    B.  Y.  MAKY. 

made,  when  he  said,  ^''Caro  Christi  caro  Marios  est^""  The  flesh  of 
Christ  is  the  flesh  of  Mary. 

As  to  the  remainder  of  that  third  division,  about  "  the  eternal 
tie  which  binds  together  the  church  and  the  Lord,"  I  characterize 
that  as  "  stuffing" — the  veriest  twaddle  and  nonsense,  and  a  very 
natural  inference  from  the  very  unnatural  premises  that  pre- 
ceded it. 

And  lastly,  in  what  language  can  I  adequately  stigmatize  the 

wholesale that  asserts  that  over  20  to  30,000  Romanists 

had  abandoned  their  church  in  the  past  year  on  account  of  the 
new  dogma  ?  Now,  reverend  sir,  that  dogma  was  promulgated 
December  8th,  1854,  over  nineteen  years  ago,  and  if  you  can 
find  for  me  a  half  dozen  persons  who,  in  that  long  period  of  time, 
are  known  to  have  abandoned  the  catholic  church  for  the  reason  above 
given,  I  am  prepared  to  make  the  most  profound  retraction  of 
the  above  assertion  ;  but  until  that  is  done,  I  shall  always,  as  I 
do  now,  aver  that  a  more  unmitigated  falsehood  was  never  before 
palmed  off  on  you,  or  on  the  deluded  people  that  swallow  with  so 
much  avidity  bait  of  that  kind. 

In  reference  to  the  doctrine  of  the  immaculate  conception,  which 
appears  to  betheZ'<?/^  «o/rofeveryprotestant  journey  man  soul-saver, 
and  the  ceaseless  theme  of  so  many  eloquent  and  profound  (?)  dia- 
tribes, let  me  call  your  attention  to  the  fact  that  in  inveighing  against 
that  doctrine  you  have  been  attacking  a  long-existing  belief  of 
the  church  of  England,  to  whose  "  nursing-care  and  protection" 
you  owe  so  much,  and  from  whose  teaching  the  daughter  protests 
against  any  "  intention  to  depart  on  any  essential  point  of  doc- 
trine, discipline  or  worship ;"  because  in  her  calendar  she  pre- 
serves (at  least  she  did  so  up  to  1751,  for  I  have  before  me  an 
English  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  published  by  Thomas  Baskett, 
of  that  date)  the  feast  of  the  conception  of  the  Blessed  Virgin 
Mary  (Dec.  8th),  a  feast  always  distinct  from  the  conception  of 
her  Son  ;.  which  was,  of  course,  pilfered  from  the  Roman  Missal, 
and  is  the  same  feast  now  observed  with  great  solemnity  through- 
out the  Christian  world  ;  and  inasmuch  as  your  prayer-book  pro- 
tests against  any  difference  in  doctrine,  discipline  and  worship 
from  the  church  of  England,  it  is  conclusive  that  you  and  your 
confreres  have  been  battling  vigorously  against  your  own  doctrine 
and  discipline  ;  or  at  least,  against  that  of  the  church  of  England. 


ADORATION    OF    THE    B.  V.  MARY.  Ol 

I  trust  that  the  mother  church  whose  "  nursir,g-care  and  protec- 
tion" have  been  so  available  will  pardon  you  the  intention,  at 
least,  of  attacking  her  belief  in  the  doctrine  of  the  immaculate 
conception ;  that  is,  if  she  has  any  belief  in  that  or  any  other 
revealed  truth  ;  for  the  widest  divergencies  of  opinion  are  coun- 
tenanced in  her  bosom.  Having  vindicated  the  catholic  church 
from  the  foul  aspersions  which  you  have  sought  to  fasten  on  her, 
I  will  conclude  the  first  part  of  this  letter,  by  expressing  a  hope 
that  you  will  remember  a  truth  of  revelation  which  had  escaped 
your  memory,  viz.  :  that  a  day  of  retribution  is  fast  approaching 
when  you  will  be  summoned  before  the  judgment  seat  of  God  to 
render  an  account  of  the  things  done  in  the  flesh,  and  that  a  com- 
mandment exists,  viz.  :  "thou  shalt  not  bear  false  witness  against 
thy  neighbor ;"  and  that  you  will  be  held  amenable  before  God 
for  the  violation  of  that  command  so  fearfully  infringed  upon  by 
you  in  charging  with  idolatry  the  spotless  spouse  of  Jesus  Christ, 
whose  voice  he  commands  you  to  hear,  but  against  whom  you 
speak  evil  things  and  whom  you  misrepresent. 


PART  II. 

"Immortal  being^s,  when  at  first  they  saw 
Great  England's  Church  expounding  Heaven's  law, 
Admired  such  antics  in  the  human  shape, 
And  showed  a  Cranmer  as  we  show  an  ape." — Parodt. 

I  will  now,  reverend  sir,  take  a  new  departure,  and  having 
vindicated  the  church  of  Christ,  proceed  to  investigate  the  right 
whereby  you  cite  before  the  tribunal  of  your  private  judgment 
the  great  body  of  christians  now  living,  Greeks  and  Latins,  as 
well  as  the  whole  christian  world,  for  the  past  (nearly)  nineteen 
centuries,  and  seek  to  fasten  on  them  a  crime  the  most  abhor- 
rent of  all  others  to  the  christian  soul,  viz.  :  idolatry  ;  and  did 
you  even  possess  such  a  right,  I  would  call  in  question  the  good 
taste  that  would  warrant  such  a  procedure.  I  would  ask  who 
are  you  that  calls  in  question  the  faith  of  330,000,000  of  living 
christians  ?  What  superior  lights  can  you  claim  for  yourself  and 
the  sect  of  protestantism  you  represent  that  would  render  such  a 
course  justifiable  ?     Is  the  source  of  your  inspiration  so  clear,  so 


22 


ADORATION    OF    THE  B.  Y.  MAR^. 


pure,  that  you  can  afford  to  play  the  Pharisee  and  give  thanks 
that  you  and  yours  are  not  like  the  rest  of  men  ?  Or  is  it  so 
very  safe  for  people  who  live  in  glass  houses  to  throw  stones  ? 
The  fact  is,  the  course  to  which  you  have  become  habituated  of 
saying  all  manner  of  things  of  the  catholic  church,  and  with  im- 
punity, is  now  so  much  a  part  of  your  nature  that  it  will  be  very 
difficult  to  abandon  so  congenial  a  pastime.  But  I  promise  you, 
reverend  sir,  that  no  one  shall  hereafter,  with  impunity,  misrepre- 
sent the  catholic  church  wherever  I  am,  provided  sufficient  evi- 
dence can  be  adduced  of  the  fact.  I  shall  now  proceed.  I  feel 
k  due  to  myself  and  the  religion  I  so  unworthily  represent  to 
unfold  a  tale  that  may  not  be  very  flattering  to  some  "  who 
trust  in  themselves  (who  are  well  pleased  with  themselves)  and 
despise  others."  But  in  so  doing  I  shall  be  careful  not  to  avail 
myself  of  the  weapons  of  calumny  ;  availing  myself  of  the  use  of 
historical  facts  only  that  cannot  be  controverted. 

I  have  quoted  from  your  book  of  common-prayer,  wherein 
your  branch  of  Protestantism  recognizes  its  obligations  to  its 
foster-mother,  the  church  of  England.  The  ackntowledgment 
of  obligations  I  object  not  to.  Gratitude  is  a  noble  trait,  but  it 
should  be  universal  to  be  commendable,  and  the  church  of  Eng- 
land merits  far  less  of  your  gratitude  than  the  Roman  catholic 
church.  You  are  grateful  to  the  former,  whilst  for  the  latter 
you  have  only  the  most  objectionable  and  offensive  epithets. 

Now  as  I  intend  to  indulge  you  with  a  panoramic  view  of  the 
institution  to  which  you  are  so  grateful,  and  which  stands  to- 
wards you  in  the  light  of  foster-mother,  I  will  at  once  plunge 
"/«  medias  res^  Did  you  ever  give  your  attention,  reverend  sir, 
to  the  baseless  and  preposterous  pretensions  of  protestantism 
generally,  and  of  "  the  Establishment"  (as  the  English  call  it)  in 
particular  ?  I  mean  in  the  light  of  history  ?  I  fear  not,  for  if  you 
did,  I  doubt  very  much  how  you  could,  with  a  clear  conscience, 
be  where  you  are  to-day.  If  not,  follow  me,  and  I  shall  treat 
you  to  a  bird's-eye  view  of  your  historic  foster-mother — and  in 
so  doing  I  shall  nothing  exaggerate  nor  aught  set  down  in  malice. 

Protestantism,  in  all  its  Protean  forms,  professes  to  discover 
its  foundation  in  the  revealed  word  of  God,  (the  bible,)  as  its  rule 
of  faith,  and  according  to  Chillingworth,  "the  bible  is  the  reli- 
gion of  protestants."     Exit  the  protestant  does  not  live  who  can 


ADORATION    OF    THE    B.  V.  MARY.  «q 

make  an  Intelligent  act  of  faith  in  the  bible  as  a  Divine  revela- 
tion. In  my  controversy  with  Dr.  Blackwell  last  fall,  I  gave 
the  world  to  see  that  the  system  which  you,  in  common  with  all 
protestants  maintain — the  motto  of  which  is  "  the  bible  is  the  re- 
ligion of  protestants" — is  utterly  baseless.  My  reverend  opponent 
on  that  occasion  did  as  well,  /,  ^.,  as  little,  as  any  other  champion 
could  have  done ;  whilst  his  failure  after  four  months'  labor  was 
4s  complete  as  it  was  aggravating  and  mortifying  to  the  vast  ma- 
jority of  protestants  who  read  the  discussion,  and  who  had  here- 
tofore believed  that  the  bible  came  to  them  "  cut  and  dry"  from 
heaven,  as  the  teacher  appointed  by  God  for  christians,  whereas 
the  issue  proved  irrefragably  that  not  a  luord  of  the  christian  part, 
or  new  testament,  could  be  proved  to  have  been  inspired  by  the 
Holy  Ghost.  Now,  reverend  sir,  if  you  think  that  Dr.  Black- 
well  did  not  do  justice  to  protestantism  in  his  effort  to  sustain  its 
very  foundation,  and  that  you  feel  impressed  with  the  conviction 
that  you  can  retrieve  the  bad  fortune  of  the  "cause"  in  Dr.  B.'s 
defeat,  let  n:e  invite  you  to  break  a  lance  with  me  for  the  main- 
tenance of  the  above  "-motto,"  which  Is  the  only  foundation  of 
protestantism  In  Its  thousand  and  one  developments.  In  accept- 
ing my  gauge  you  will  be  far  more  legitimately  occupied  than  In 
misrepresenting  the  catholic  church  ;  and  although  the  occupa- 
tion will  not  be  as  congenial  nor  as  easy  a  task,  it  will  be  far 
more  legitimate  according  to  christian  ethics,  and,  if  I  may  be 
allowed  to  hazard  an  opinion,  far  more  necessary,  for  the  expo- 
sure of  the  utter  weakness  of  the  foundation  of  protestantism  was 
so  conclusive  that  were  I  a  protestant  hitherto,  I  should  not  re- 
main so  one  hour  after  the  close  of  that  discussion. 

If,  then,  you  feel  that  you  can  restore  the  biblical  system  to  a 
solid  basis  by  entering  the  lists  with  me  for  that  end,  I  am  at 
your  .service,  with  a  promise  of  fair  play  and  a  clear  stage.  But 
if,  taught  by  a  sad  experience,  you  decline  the  issue,  let  me  ask 
you,  as  an  honest  man,  how  can  your  conscience  permit  you  to 
retain  the  I'dle  of  teacher  of  a  religion,  the  very  basis  of  which  has 
not  one  inch  of  solid  ground  whereon  to  rest?  The  controversy  of 
last  fall  has  forever  decided  the  fact  that  the  biblical  system 
started  on  a  false  basis,  viz.  :  the  assumption  of  the  bible  as  a 
divine  revelation,  and  every  argument  in  its  defence  advanced  by 
Dr.  Blackwell  and  demolished  by  me,  was   the  death-blow  to 


£4 


ADORATION   OF   THE   B.  V.   MAEY. 


your  rule  of  faith  as  well  as  to  his,  for  you  are  "  ab  ovo  prognatus 
eodenC^  with  him  ;  that  is,  your  protestant  episcopal  church  and 
the  methodist  church  are  twin  sisters  of  the  same  honored ! 
mother.  I  am  aware  that  you  do  not  acknowledge  the  connection, 
but  before  the  close  of  this  letter  you  will  think  better  of  your 
''  poor  relations."  I  take  it  for  granted  that  you  will  have  to 
accept  the  result  of  that  discussion,  viz.  :  that  neither  you  nor 
any  of  your  following  can  make  an  intelligent  act  of  faith  in  the 
Divine  inspiration  of  the  bible,  the  rule  of  faith  common  to  all 
protestants ;  unless,  indeed,  you  do  me  the  honor  to  assume  the 
championship  of  the  "  cause,"  and  enter  the  lists  with  me.  Be- 
fore proceeding  further,  I  would  call  your  attention  to  the  gross 
absurdity  of  a  religion  without  one  presentable  argument  to  main- 
tain its  very  foundation,  a  sad  spectacle  to  men  and  angels,  and 
having  invited  attention  to  this  irreparable  defect,  let  me  now 
invite  you  to  an  analysis  or  rather  a  historic  scrutiny  of  the 
origin  and  development  of  the  English  establishment  in  the  first 
place,  and  secondly,  of  her  daughter,  the  protestant  episcopal 
church  of  the  United  States.  It  is  acknowledged  by  your  prayer- 
book  that  you  derive  what  you  possess  of  "  doctrine^  discipline 
and  worship  from  the  church  of  England,  as  by  law  established," 
though  the  sequel  will  prove  that  you  have  not  much  to  be  thank- 
ful for.  In  the  year  1530,  Henry  the  Eighth  of  England,  in  the 
midst  of  his  lustful  excesses,  conceived  an  adultrous  passion  for 
one  of  his  queen's  train.  She,  Anna  Boleyn,  a  bad  catholic,  en- 
couraged the  advances  of  the  wretch.  The  king  endeavored  to 
influence  the  Holy  See  to  aid  him  in  his  lusts  by  declaring  the 
union  with  his  faithful  wife  null  and  void.  The  church  could 
not,  without  proving  faithless  to  her  spouse,  "put  asunder  what 
God  had  joined  together."  A  union  could  not  therefore  be 
effected  without  a  breach  with  the  Holy  See.  Passion  is  blind — 
the  adulterers  cohabit,  and  the  christian  religion  is  sacrificed. 
And  this  is  only  one  of  the  thousands  of  similar  instances  annu- 
ally occurring  in  this  so-called  christian  country,  whenever  pas- 
sion, prejudice  or  interest  impels  spouses  to  shuflle  off  the  marital 
coil,  and  the  legislatures,  with  scarcely  an  exception,  facilitate 
by  divorce-granting  this  "  wicked  thing." 

Anyhow,  the  king,  by  advice  of  Thomas  Cromwell,  a  layman 
and  a  soldier,  proved  himself  equal  to  the  emergency,  and  having 


ADORATION   OF   THE   B.    V.  MARY. 


25 


broken' relatiors  with  the  Holy  See  by,  of  course,  a  mock-mar- 
riage with  Anna,  improved  his  opportunities  to  replete  his  ex- 
hausted treasury  (although  his  father  had  died  with  the  treasury 
filled  to  repletion)  by  Inaugurating  a  system  of  pillage,  rapine  and 
sacrilege  unparalleled  on  the  earth. 

To  give  system  and  character  to  his  projected  spoliations  he 
appointed  his  trusty  subject  Thomas  Cromwell  (the  right  man 
in  the  right  place)  to  be  his  "  royal  vicegerent  and  vlcar-general" 
of  the  new  dispensation  of  which  he,  a  layman,  was  the  head. 
This  was  the  origin  of  that  highly  respectable  Institution  "  the 
church  of  England." 

The  extravagances  of  the.  head,  and  the  avarice  of  the  vicar- 
general  very  soon  found  fat  pastures  in  the  pillage  of  the  religious 
houses  of  once  happy  catholic  England,  and  this  brace  of  robbers, 
with  their  only  too-willing  confederates,  set  their  hearts  on  ap- 
propriating 3182  religious  houses  of  both  sexes,  and  the  king 
issued  his  order  that  they  be  sequestered,  and  when  his  parlia- 
ment offered  the  slightest  remonstrance,  he  summarily  informed 
them,  "  I  will  have  It  (the  sequestration-bill)  pass,  or  I  will 
have  some  of  your  heads."  The  argument  was  equally  striking 
as  overwhelming,  and  forty-seven  thousand  seven  hundred  and 
twenty-one  religious,  the  glory  of  England,  the  salt  of  that  earth, 
were  forthwith  cast  forth  on  the  world,  houseless,  penniless,  and 
succorless. 

This  inauguration  of  the  church  of  England  bears  so  close  a ' 
resemblance  to  the  religion  instituted  by  Jesus  Christ  that  I  can- 
not forbear  calling  attention  to  it.  Jesus  went  about  doing  good, 
and  so  did  bluff  Harry,  scattering  to  the  mercy  of  the  world 
nearly  fifty  thousand  souls — behold  the  first  fruits  of  the  glorious 
reformation  and  the  new  birth  of  the  church  of  England  ! 

The  next  step  taken  was  to  organize  a  department  at  once,  as 
a  substitute  for  Christianity,  now  overthrown,  and  in  order  to 
habituate  the  people  by  degrees  to  the  change,  the  appearances 
of  religion  were  to  be  kept  up,  and  forthwith  a  new  form  of 
prayer-book  is  manufactured,  for  the  missal  and  Its  concomitant 
devotional  books  will  never  suit  the  new  religion — so-called. 
"  The  Institution  of  a  Christian  Man,"  is  the  title  of  the  new 
prayer-book,  which.  In.  a  few  years  after,  gave  place  to  a  new 
production  entitled  "  A  necessary  doctrine  and  erudition  for  any 


26  ADORATION   OF   THE    B.   V.   MARY. 

christian  man."     These,  in  the  days  of  Henry,  constituted  the 
sources  whence  English  Christianity  (reformed)  was  to  draw  its 
inspiration.      But  it  was  in  the  days  of  Edward  that   "  the  book 
of   common-prayer   and  administration  of  the   sacraments    and 
other  rites  and   ceremonies  of  the   church  after  the  use  of  the 
church   of  England,"   made   its  appearance  ;  and   Dr.    Short,  a 
bishop  of  the  same  church,  and  a  writer  of  a  history  of  the  church 
of  England,  says  of  the  last  production,  that  exists  in  a  whittled- 
down,  or,  to  be  more  select,  revised  form,  to  this  day  :   "  On  the 
whole,  this  book  forms  a  connecting-link  between  the  missal  and 
the  prayer-book."     By-the-bye,  my  attention  has  been  recently- 
called  to  an  attempt  made  to  consider  Henry  a  catholic  all  his 
lifetime,  and  to  accord  the  glory  of  the  reformation  to  the  well- 
begotten  and  virgin  daughter  of  Anna  Boleyn  ;  but  whilst  I  can- 
not find  fault  with  the  sentiment  that  would  seek  to  rob  the  good 
father  of  the  equally  honorable  paternity  !  of  the  English  church, 
yet  the  fact  is  too  patent ;  the  title  of  Edward's  prayer-book  "for 
the  use  of  the  church  of  England,"  cannot  be  denied ;  therefore 
"  the  church  of  England"  took  precedence  of  the  prayer-book ; 
therefore   Elizabeth  could  not  be,  possibly,  the  foundress  of  the 
English   church.     If  further  proofs   are   needed  to  sustain  this 
position  and  deprive  such  quibblers  of  any  consolation  whatever 
on  this  point,  whilst  at  the  same  time  it  w!ll  unfold  the  unblush- 
ing hypocrisy  of  saints  Cranmer,  Latimer,  and  Ridley,  of  whom 
the  books  of  homilies  are  the  joint  production ;  which  books  are 
approved   and   commended   by  your  prayer-book  (35th  article). 
Read  attentively  the  following  words :  "  Honor  be  to  God  who 
did  put  light  in  the  heart  of  His  faithful  and  true  minister  of  most 
famous   memory.  King  Henry  the  Eighth,  and    gave    him  the 
knowledge  of  His  word,  and  an  earnest  affection  to  seek   His 
glory   and   to  put  away  all  such  superstitions,"  &c.  (p.  52,  Am. 
ed.).      I  challenge   the  world  to   produce  a  specimen  of  arrant 
hypocrisy  to  equal  that  sentence.      "  God's  faithful  and  true  min- 
ister"  forsooth  !       A  monster,    the  disgrace   not  of  Christianity 
alone,  but   of  humanity  in  its  type  the  most  conceivably  lowest ! 
A  Nero  whose  monstrosities  were  never  before  or  after  matched 
on  this  earth  !     The  impersonation  for  seventeen  years  of  every 
crime  in  the  calendar!     This  wretch   "God's  faithful  and  true 
minister."     Language  cannot  be  invented  that  could  do  justice 


ADORATION   OF   THE   B.  V.    MARY.  27 

to  the  hideousness  of  the  souls  that  gave  expression  to  this  speci- 
men of  double-distilled  hypocrisy. 

This  Bluebeard  ;  this  miscreant  of  whom  it  was  truthfully  said 
that  "  he  never  spared  man  in  his  wrath,  nor  woman  in  his  lust!'* 
Were  it  proposed  to  distinguish  between  the  characters  of  Nero, 
Caligula  and  the  saintly  head  of  the  church  of  England,  "  God's 
faithful  and  true  minister,"  could  there  be  a  moment's  hesitation 
in  the  choice  of  Henry  as  the  monster^  par  excellence,  of  the 
human  race  ?  And  this  is  the  man  whom  God  had  chosen  to 
reform  His  church  !  And  these  arch-hypocrites  are  his  apostles 
and  coadjutors  !  Wonder  they  had  not  narrated  how  they  had 
heard  a  voice  from  heaven,  announcing  this  "  is  my  (God's)  beloved 
son  in  whom  I  am  well  pleased."  And  there  yet  exist  people 
who  believe  that  God  had  chosen  this  monster  and  his  accursed 
brood  for  the  purification  of  His  church  !  Did  time  and  space 
permit,  I  could  furnish  you  a  faithful  picture  of  the  origin  of  this 
purified  !  church  of  the  Redeemer  that  would  compel  the  blush 
of  shame  to  mantle  your  cheek  for  your  connection  with  such  a 
nefarious  and  diabolical  institution  ;  no  word-painting  would  suf- 
fice to  portray  justly  its  hideousness,  and  the  sooner  that  its  ex- 
istence ceases  in  England  (and  this  will  not  take  four  lustrums) 
and  its  name  be  erased  from  the  historic  archives  of  England,  if 
that  were  possible,  the  better  for  England. 

We  have  had  a  glimpse  of  Henry's  tact  in  replenishing  his 
exhausted  treasury,  by  the  wholesale  sacrilegious  pillage  of  the 
property  of  the  church,  how  he  could,  in  the  most  summary 
manner,  get  rid  of  his  wives,  parliament,  &c.  Let  me  now  in- 
troduce you  to  his  hopeful  scion,  Edward,  "a  chip  of  the  old 
block."  I  will  quote  the  historian  Heylin  (Reformation).  He 
says,  "  Edward's  death,  I  cannot  reckon  for  an  infelicity  to  the 
church  of  England,  for  being  ill-principled  in  himself*  &c.  And 
why  no  infelicity  ?  "  but  that  the  rest  of  the  bishopricks,  before 
sufficiently  impoverished,  must  have  followed  Durham,"  &c. 
Dr.  Heylin  plainly  intimates  that  if  Edward  had  not  died  so  soon, 
the  establishment  would  have  passed  away  before  him  (such  was 
his  rapacity),  and  the  English  government  would  not  have  the 
opportunity  to  preserve  a  department,  rich  in  property  sacrile- 
giously sequestrated,  and  make  it  a  soft  place,  for  generations,  for 
the  supporters  of  succeeding  administrations.     And  now  let  us 


28 


ADORATION    OF   THE   B.  V.   MAEY. 


see  how  this  godly  work  under  such  godly  and  saintly  patronage 
and  guidance  progressed.  Of  course,  the  people  of  England, 
influenced  by  the  feeling  of  an  absolute  necessity  for  a  reforma- 
tion, entered  with  alacrity  into  the  feelings  of  its  pure  and  disin- 
terested promoters  and  were  only  too  glad  to  acquiesce  in  the 
much-needed  and  promising  change  !  Alas  !  for  our  anticipa- 
tions :  the  people  were  wedded  to  their  idols.  Bishop  Short  tells 
us  that  "the  change  was  not  so  much  that  of  the  people  as  of 
the  king  and  parliament !"  The  truth  is,  a  system  of  legal  en- 
actments was  framed  that  compelled  their  compliance. 

Hear  Bishop  Short  on  this  point :  "  Individuals  were  not  al- 
lowed any  christian  liberty  of  absenting  themselves  from  the 
churches  and  of  seeking  elsewhere  a  service  better  suited  to  their 
own  opinions."  So  much  for  the  treatment  of  the  people  gener- 
ally. Now  what  mode  of  treatment  was  adopted  towards  the  rich 
and  influential  ?  Hear  Bishop  Short  once  again  ;  he  says  :  "The 
masses  of  the  common  people  neither  understood  nor  rejoiced  in 
the  doctrines  of  the  reformation,  against  which  their  prejudices 
were  excited.  The  upper  classes  had  been  bribed  into  acqui- 
escence in  these  changes,  by  the  robberies  committed  on  the 
church  property,  in  which  they  had  been  allowed  to  share." 
What  a  picture  one  of  your  English  B'shops  presents  of  the  mo- 
tives that,  from  king  to  the  least  sacrilegious  robber,  actuated  the 
miscreants  !  In  plain  English,  the  gentry,  to  gain  them,  were 
bribed  with  more  or  less  of  the  booty,  and  the  poorer  classes  were 
forced,  like  dogs,  to  comply  with  the  mockery  of  religion  which 
the  rapacious  wolves  had  substituted  for  Christianity.  Reverend 
sir,  can  there  be  traced  here  any  of  the  zeal  that  animated  the  apos- 
tles of  Jesus  Christ  ?  Does  it  not  amount  almost  to  blasphemy  to 
mention  them  in  such  connection  ?  Were  such  the  motives  that 
prompted  Augustine  and  his  companions,  when  they  brought 
Christianity  to  the  British  shores  ?  We  cannot  possibly  conceive 
the  outraged  feelings  of  the  people  of  England,  under  this  aspect 
of  affairs.  They  are  forced  by  the  severest  penalties  to  enter 
the  churches  which  the  piety  of  their  ancestors  had  erected,  and 
which  they  loved  to  ornament  and  embellish,  now  defaced  and 
robbed  of  every  vestige  of  beauty,  their  altars  demolished,  theif 
shrines  sacrilegiously  pillaged,  the  jewelled  chalices  sold.  But, 
it   may  be  asked,  did  the  people  willingly  submit   to  these  out- 


ADORATION    OF    THE    II.  V.  MARY. 


29 


rages  ?  No  ;  they  rose  in  arms  in  large  numbers,  in  some  sec- 
tions of  the  country,  but  they  were  soon  subdued,  and  there  was 
no  alternative  but  to  submit  to  the  new  dispensation,  or  perish 
in  prison  or  on  the  scaffold.  In  a  word,  the  intimidation  of 
despotism  forced  compliance,  and  to  unfold  a  specimen  of  the 
apostolic,  lady-like  mode  of  church-government  that  prevailed 
in  those  days,  let  me  copy  an  order  which  Hallam  quotes  from 
the  petticoat  head  of  the  church  (Elizabeth)  to  one  of  her  Bishops : 

"  Coxe.  Proud  prelate,  you  know  what  you  were  before  I 
made  you  what  you  are  ;  if  you  do  not  immediately  comply  with 
my  request,  by  God  I  will  unfrock  you.     Elizabeth.'* 

Comment  would  be  superfluous  here.  To  proceed  further, 
would  be  "  to  pile  Pelion  on  Ossa."  Never  before  in  the  his- 
tory of  the  human  race,  did  there  exist  a  more  nefarious,  system- 
atized plot  to  blot  out  the  religion  of  a  christian  people,  and  to 
impose  as  a  substitute  therefor  an  organization,  which  in  its  in- 
ception, progress  and  consummation,  stands  unrivalled  in  the 
annals  of  infamy.  Robbery,  sacrilege,  murder,  fire,  and  sword, 
and  every  conceivable  instrument  of  despotism  and  infamy,  were 
the  concomitants  of  this  so-called  reformation.  Oh,  the  blas- 
phemy underlying  the  declaration  of  the  miscreants  who  called 
this  the  work  of  God  ! 

It  was  conceived  in  lust,  born  in  pillage,  sacrilege  and  blood, 
and  was  consummated  in  the  substitution  of  a  system  for  Chris- 
tianity that  emanated  from  the  brain  and  hearts  of  the  most  cor- 
rupt, debased,  perjured  horde,  that,  without  exception,  ever  dis- 
graced our  race,  or  polluted,  by  contact  therewith,  this  earth 
of  ours.  Had  I  the  time  to  do  justice  to  each  character  that 
won  laurels  for  himself  in  this  godly  (!)  work,  and  to  adduce 
my  authorities  from  friendly  sources,  too,*  I  would  compel  the 
conclusion  that  they  stand  unrivalled  in  their  career  of  infamy. 
And  oh,  my  infinitely  patient  God,  the  blasphemy  of  attributing 
to  Thee,  the  infinitely  beautiful,  good  and  holy,  the  choice  of 
iuch  miscreants  to  reform  what  Thou  didst  promise  to  preside  over 
to  the  consummation  of  the  world !  Has  blasphemy  ever  before 
had  its  parallel  in  this  ?  And  yet  there  are  men,  otherwise  well 
disposed,  who  seek  to  exculpate  and  find  excuses  for  these  fiends 
and  their  brutal  excesses  I 


30  ADORATION   OF   THE  B.  V.  MAEY. 

As  I  have  not  the  leisure  to  unlock  and  unfold  further  the  re- 
cesses of  the  abyss  of  wickedness  which  England  will;  for  all  fu- 
ture generations,  blush  deeply  for,  and  heartily  wish  had  never 
found  a  place  in  her  history,  I  will  beg  leave  to  refer  you  to  the 
History  of  the  Protestant  Reformation,  by  Wm.  Cobbett,  formerly 
a  Member  of  the  British  Parliament,  one  who  lived  and  died  a 
protestant;  whilst  no  attempt  has  ever  been  made  to  contradict 
the  array  of  facts  and  figures  furnished  by  him  in  reference  to 
the  history  of  the  murders,  and  wholesale  pillage  of  church  pro- 
perty which  will  forever  sully  the  escutcheon  of  England. 

But  it  may  be  said,  that  after  the  first  impulses  of  passion  had 
passed  away,  the  new  religion  commenced  to  develop  its  reforma- 
tory powers  ;  alas  for  any  such  hope  !  the  miscreants  robbed  the 
people  of  their  religion,  and  as  a  make-shift  flung  them  a  substi- 
tute which  they  were  by  law  compelled  to  adopt,  that  has  never 
had  one  particle  of  vitality  in  it.  To  be  sure  they  secured  the  titles 
together  with  the  livings  of  the  catholic  prelates,  but  as  to  the 
life-giving  sources  whence  Christianity  dispenses  her  treasures 
to  mankind,  there  is  not  a  remnant  of  them  left,  nor  did  the  loss 
concern  them,  as  I  shall  hereafter  show.  The  fact  is,  when  the 
catholic  church  was  uprooted  in  England  the  king  deemed  it 
prudent  to  have  at  least  the  semblance  of  religion,  and  with  this 
view,  he  organized  a  new  department  of  the  civil  service,  to  be 
immediately  under  his  own  control,  having  ample  funds  (the  in- 
come of  each  diocese  for  the  bishop's  support),  and  calling  the 
embryo  bantling,  by  a  refinement  of  irony,  the- church  of  Eng- 
land, and  which  under  his  patronage,  with  the  aid  of  a  servile  and 
obsequious  parliament,  distributed  to  his  minions  the  fruits  of 
that  portion  of  the  church  property  which  was  decided  to  be 
retained,  to  furnish  a  pretext  for  the  nominal  existence  of  Chris- 
tianity on  the  island. 

That  the  so-called  church  of  England,  from  the  day  king 
Harry  broke  with  the  holy  see,  and  gave  it  existence,  to  this  day, 
was  and  is  a  department  of  the  civil  administration  of  the  English 
government,  follows  from  the  confession  of  the  books  of  homi- 
lies— the  above  letter  of  Elizabeth,  the  quotations  from  Bishop 
Short,  recognizing  the  fact  that  its  legislation  and  destiny  were 
controlled  always  by  the  king  and  parliament ;  but  lest  I  may  not 
have  adduced  sufficient  evidence  to   enforce  conviction  on  this 


ADORATION    OF   THE    B.  V.  MARY. 


31 


important  point,  and  which  will  conclusively  settle  the  question,  I 
will  invite  your  attention  to  the  following  irrefutable,  and  at  the 
same  time  highly  respectable  testimony. 

Lord  iMacaulay  (chap.  I,  "  History  of  England  ")  says  :  "What 
Henry  and  his  favorite  counsellors  meant  by  the  supremacy,  was 
certainly  nothing  less  than  the  whole  power  of  the  keys.  The 
king  was  to  be  the  pope  of  his  kingdom,  the  vicar  of  God,  the 
expositor  of  catholic  verity,  the  channel  of  sacramental  graces. 
He  proclaimed  that  all  jurisdiction,  spiritual  as  well 
as  temporal,  was  derived  from  him  alone,  and  that  it  was  in  his 
power  to  confer  the  episcopal  character  and  to  take  it  away.  He 
actually  ordered  his  seal  to  be  put  to  commissions  by  which  bish- 
ops were  appointed  who  were  to  exercise  their  functions  during 
his  royal  pleasure.  According  to  this  system,  as  expounded 
by  Cranmer,  the  king  was  the  spiritual  as  well  as  the  temporal 
chief  of  the  nation.  In  both  capacities  his  highness  must  have 
lieutenants.  It  was  unnecessary  that  there  should  be  any  impo- 
sition of  hands.  The  king  might,  in  virtue  of  authority  derived 
from  God,  make  a  priest,  and  the  priest  so  made  needed  no  or- 
dination whatever."  Thus,  Baron  Macaulay.  Now  hear  a  few 
words  from  Cranmer  himself:  "All  christian  princes  have  com- 
mitted unto  them  immediately  of  God,  the  whole  care  of  all  their 
subjects,  as  well  concerning  the  administration  of  God's  word  for 
the  care  of  souls,  as  concerning  the  ministration  of  things  political 
and  civil  governance  ;  as  for  example,  the  lord  chancellor,  lord 
treasurer,  etc.,  and  the  bishops,  parsons,  vicars,  etc.,  etc.  All  such 
officers  and  ministers  to  be  appointed,  with  divers  solemnitie's, 
which  be  not  of  necessity,  but  only  for  good  order  and  seemly 
fashion."  There  can  be  now  no  doubt  that  Henry  VIII.,  and 
Thomas  Cromwell,  two  laymen  (the  latter  as  vicar  general  of 
his  holiness,  the  former)  created  a  new  religion  in  England,  and 
controlled  its  machinery  as  fully  as  they  did  any  other  branch  or 
department  of  the  government.  That  this  condition  of  things 
was  fully  maintained  by  his  son  Edward,  and  by  his  daughter 
Elizabeth,  without  the  slightest  diminution  of  prero^-ative,  is 
evinced  from  successive  acts  of  parliament,  I  Edward,  6,  3,  and 
I  Elizabeth,  i,  extracts  from  which  are  now  before  me.  How  it 
can  be  assumed  that  "  the  church  of  England,  as  by  law  estab- 
lished," for  such  is  its  title,  and  it  is  evident  that  it  does  not,  from 


32  ADOKATIUW    Ut'    THE   B.   V.  MARY. 

the  very  title,  claim  any  existence  until  established  by  law ;  how, 
I  say,  it  can  be  assumed  that  any  more  spirituality,  either  intrin- 
sically or  accidentally,  exists  or  ever  did  exist,  in  this  co-ordinate 
department  of  the  British  government,  more  than  in  the  treasury 
or  any  other,  I  cannot  possibly  divine.  Did  the  spirituality  de- 
rive from  the  king,  his  son  or  daughter  ?  whence  their  jurisdic- 
tion unless  self-assumed,  and  written  in  the  blood  and  pillage  of 
their  subjects,  and  in  the  enormous  sacrileges  in  which  the  babe 
of  the  new  dispensation  was  ushered  into  the  world?  Were  these 
three  immaculates  ordained  bishops,  or  did  they  prove  by  their 
miracles  their  calling  to  the  jurisdiction  they  assumed  ?  Not- 
withstanding, we  hear  now  and  then  something  about  apostolic 
succession.  Let  us  briefly  sift  the  claim  thereto.  In  addition  to 
the  above  testimonies  very  little  need  be  said,  the  treasury  hav- 
ing as  good  a  claim,  and  if  any,  a  decidedly  more  decent  one  to 
any  interference  or  association  with  the  Holy  Ghost,  than  the 
monstrosity,  "  the  establishment ;"  but  we  will  devote  a  little 
more  space  to  the  consideration  of  this  absurd  pretention.  In 
the  thirty-fifth  article  of  prayer-book  we  read  :  "  The  book  of 
consecration  of  archbishops,  bishops,  and  ordering  of  priests  an^ 
deacons,  lately  set  forth  by  Edward  VI.,  and  confirmed  by  act 
of  parliament,"  etc.  Now  the  confirmation  and  setting  forth  by 
parliament  and  king  of  the  book  of  consecration,  etc.,  of  bishops 
leaves  no  doubt  of  the  source  of  the  apostolic  succession  in  the 
days  of  Edward.  Again,  when  Elizabeth  ascended  the  throne, 
she  banished  the  catholic  prelates  from  their  sees,  and  to  supply 
their  places  was  now  the  difiiculty.  Parker  was  appointed  by 
the  head  of  the  restored  "church  of  England,"  as  archbishop  of 
Canterbury,  but  before  the  validity  of  his  consecration,  and 
therefore  the  validity  of  the  consecration  of  all  future  incum- 
bents of  sees,  could  be  admitted,  two  points  were  to  be  settled : 
1st.  Did  Parker  ever  go  through  any  form  of  consecration  what- 
ever ?  2d.  Was  the  form  of  consecration  used  in  the  days  of 
Elizabeth,  and  borrowed  from  Edward  VI,  a  valid  one?  Were 
it  possible  to  prove  for  Parker  any  form  or  ceremony  of  conse- 
cration whatsoever,  and  it  is  not  possible  so  to  do^  although  the  most 
assiduous  and  persevering  efforts  have  been  made  in  that  direc- 
tion, it  is  a  question  of  fact  ^  and  one  of  the  highest  importance, 
that  the  form  which  alone  had  been  in  use  for  one   hundred  and 


ADORATION    OF   THE    B.   V.  MARY.  03 

ten  years,  that  is,  during  the  reigns  of  Edward,  Elizabeth,  James 
I.  and  Charles  I.,  had  no  more  bearing  on  the  consecration  of  a 
bishop  than  it  would  have  on  the  ordination  of  a  deacon  ;  as 
judge  by. the  following  verbatim  copy  in  use  over  a  century: 
"  Take  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  remember  that  thou  stir  up  the 
grace  of  God  which  is  in  thee,  by  the  imposition  of  hands  ;  for 
God  has  not  given  us  the  spirit  of  fear,  but  of  power,  and  love, 
and  soberness."  It  is  evident,  from  the  above  form,  to  the  most 
superficial  observer,  that  it  is  utterly  indefinite,  and  would  apply 
to  any  order  as  well  as  that  of  bishop,  so  that  the  deacon  or  priest 
(so-called)  and  for  whose  ordination  the  same  form  had  been 
used  for  over  a  century,  by  act  of  parliament,  was  as  much  a 
bishop  as  the  archbishop  of  Canterbury,  and  in  this  I  am  borne 
out  by  Burnet  himself,  who,  speaking  of  the  authors  of  the  arti- 
cles, says :  "  Now  Cranmer  was  the  author  of  that  form,  after 
he  had  discarded  the  form  found  in  the  Roman  Pontifical,"  and 
to  prove  how  loosely  he  thought  on  the  subject,  I  will  quote 
Bishop  Short  once  more  :  "  He  (Cranmer),  seems  to  esteem  the 
whole  of  the  clerical  office,  as  dependent  entirely  on  the  civil 
magistrate,  that  there  was  originally  no  diff'erence  between  a 
bishop  and  a  priest,  that  the  prince  or  the  people  might  make  a 
priest  for  themselves,  for  whom  no  consecration  was  necessary." 
Behold  the  man  who  composed  the  above  form  of  consecration, 
that  for  over  a  century  gave  bishops  and  priests  to  the  church  of 
England  !  Even  Hooker  admitted  that  "  there  may  be  very  just 
and  suflicient  reasons  to  allow  ordination  made  without  a  bishop." 
(Eccl.  Polity,  Book  7,  chapter  14).  Can  any  one,  after  this 
exposS  flatter  himself  with  the  fond  delusion  that  such  an  idea  as 
apostolic  succession  was  admissible,  when  the  very  authors  of  the 
schism  manifested  so  supreme  a  contempt  for  the  silly  dream  .? 
A  vain  attempt  had  been  made  to  conceal  the  anxiety  that  pre- 
vailed even  then  as  regards  the  validity  of  orders,  as  the  second 
clause  of  the  twenty-third  article  evinces  :  "And  those  we  ought 
to  judge  as  lawfully  called  and  sent  which  be  chosen  and  called 
to  this  work  by  men  who  have  public  authority  given  unto  them 
in  the  congregation,  to  call  and  send  ministers  into  the  Lord's 
vineyard."  Now  I  defy  the  most  ingenious  sophist  to  unravel 
this  specimen  of  studied  ambiguity.     It  was  composed  to   cover 


34  ADORATION   OF  THE   B.  V,   MAEY. 

tracks  that  must,  if  possible,  be  concealed.  Who  are  the  men 
who  have  public  authority  in  the  congregation  ?  Are  they 
bishops  or  laymen  ?  It  matters  not,  for  the  bishops  derived 
their  authority  from  laymen  and  women.  But  hear  Bishop  Bur- 
net on  this  article  ;  he  says  .  "  The  article  leaves  the  matter  open 
and  at  large  for  such  accidents  as  had  happened.''  Burnet  was  well 
acquainted  with  the  secret  springs  and  backslidings  of  those  who 
controlled  matters  in  those  days,  and  mildly  but  plainly  hints 
that  a  screw  was  loose,  that  the  chain  of  apostolic  succession 
was  snapt  in  twain,  never  to  be  relinked,  and  that  it  was  neces- 
sary that  this  article  should  be  so  worded  as  to  make  the  best  of 
the  mishap  plainly  acknowledged,  and  cover  up  tracks  that  are 
admitted  to  have  existed  and  which  necessarily  are  irreparable. 

After  this,  what,  think  you,  were  the  sentiments  of  Bishop 
Burnet  as  regards  apostolic  succession  ?  The  prospects  of  up- 
holding any  such  delusion  in  his  day  were  very  far  from  being 
likely  to  have  secured  his  acquiescence.  The  only  conclusion 
deducible  from  the  above  array  of  facts  and  testimonies  is,  that  a 
more  preposterous  claim  was  never  sought  to  be  palmed  off  on 
the  deluded  followers  of  a  system,  the  origin,  progress  and  con- 
surhmation  of  which  flings  defiance  in  the  face  of  the  most  infa- 
mous organization  that  ever  found  existence  amongst  men  ;  and 
as  to  your  claim,  a  fort  tori  .^  to  apostolic  succession,  the  following 
axiom  seals  its  validity :  "  Quod  ah  initio  nullum  est.,  tractu  tem- 
poris  non  convalescit.'^  And  did  you  have  even  a  legitimate  title 
to  be  considered  validly  ordained,  of  which  the  above  arguments, 
facts,  and  testimonies  prove  you  destitute  of  even  the  very  shadow, 
what  would  it  avail  you  practically?  St.  Paul  says:  "  So  let 
men  regard  us  as  the  ministers  of  Christ  and  dispensers  of  the 
mysteries  of  God."  Your  confreres  in  England  are,  ipso  facto. 
ministers  of  the  English  crown,  salaried  by  her  Britannic  majesty, 
the  establishment  being,  to  say  the  least,  a  kind  of  supernumerary 
moral  police  establishment,  harmless,  but  well  supported  (a  large 
fund  having  been  reserved  for  the  officials  from  the  general  pil- 
lage over  300  years  ago),  but  as  to  being  regarded  as  ministers  of 
God,  the  whole  christian  world  sees  in  them  only  the  paid  hire- 
lings of  Henry  the  Eighth  and  his  successors,  whilst  it  has  ever 
scouted  the  idea  of  their  ever  having  had  any  intimation  of  a  call- 
ing from  God.     As  to  being  considered  "  dispensers  of  the  mys- 


ADORATION   OF   THE   B.    V.    MARY. 


35 


teries  of  God."  These  mysteries  of  God  were  the  seven  sacra- 
ments instituted  by  Jesus  Christ,  the  visible  signs  and  channels 
of  the  graces  purchased  by  His  blood  for  the  regeneration,  nour- 
ishment and  fortifying  of  the  souls  of  christians,  and  where  are 
they  to  be  dispensed  ?  Five  out  of  the  seven  have,  centuries  ago, 
been  thrown  overboard  (a  work  of  supererogation,  there  being  no 
dispensers  of  them)  by  the  royal  moral  police  commissioners  and 
subsequently  by  the  foster-child,  the  protestant  episcopal  church 
of  the  United  States,  your  prayer-book  testifying  in  its  usually 
intentionally-ambiguous  style  that  there  are  only  two  generally 
necessary  to  salvation.  He  would  indeed  be  a  clever  interpreter 
that  could  satisfactorily  furnish  light  to  read  intelligently,  or  furnish 
small  change  to  clear  up  the  ingeniously  contrived  lights  and 
shades  of  that  phrase  of  Mr.  Cranmer  and  Co.  It  is  suggestive 
of  fraud  and  bad  faith. 

And  what  are  these  two  sacraments  ?  They  are  entitled  bap- 
tism and  the  Lord's  supper.  The  church  of  Jesus  Christ  has 
always  had  a  sacrament  known  by  the  title  of  the  holy  eucharist 
— the  Greek  fathers  gave  it  that  name  most  appropriately,  and 
the  church  has  ever  since  accorded  It  that  nomenclature — this 
holy  sacrament  contains  unequivocally  the  body  and  blood  of  our 
Divine  Redeemer  under  the  outward  forms  of  bread  and  wine, 
and  no  other  teaching  was  ever  received  amongst  christians  from 
the  Infancy  of  the  church,  and  such  has  been  the  belief  of  every 
sect  that  separated  from  the  church,  even  in  remote  antiquity. 
But  for  the  first  time  in  the  history  of  Christianity  we  are  intro- 
duced to  a  new  sacrament  called  the  Lord's  supper — a  discovery 
for  which  the  holy  reformers  deserve  the  fervent  thanks  of  man- 
kind !  But  if  you  seek  to  analyze  the  ingredients  of  the  new 
gift,  you  are  Invited  to  the  book  of  common  prayer  for  informa- 
tion, and  you  will  never,  I  promise  you,  arrive  at  a  satisfactory 
conclusion  as  to  what  it  is  composed  of — the  language  of  the 
book  having  been,  according  to  Tallyrand,  purposely  selected  to 
deceive.  Should  you  consult  the  "  lights,"  i,  ^.,  the  living  ex- 
ponents of  the  language  of  the  prayer-book,  on  this  important 
question,  you  will  close  your  investigation  more  mystified  than 
ever — for  the  lights  In  the  adjoining  States  of  Virginia  and  Mary- 
land are  "  toto  coelo'^  opposed  in  their  views.     The  fact  is,  the 


Qg  ADORATION   OF-  THE   B.    V.    MABY. 

oracle  will  not  speak,  or  like  the  thimble-riggers  pea  "  you  see  it 
there,  and  then  you  don't  see  it." 

Anyhow,  the  sad  practical  result  is,  that  millions  of  well-dis- 
posed christians  are  robbed  of  the  grandest  gift  that  God  ever 
bestowed  on  man  by  his  last  will  and  testament.  What  a  sad 
falling  off,  my  friends  ?  What  a  parody  on  the  infinite  bounty 
of  the  Redeemer!  the  gift  which  He  promised  should  be  infi- 
nitely superior  to  the  manna  (a  supernatural  food),  (John  6  c), 
now  dwindled  down  to  the  common  food  and  drink  of  the  eating- 
house  !  And  this  is,  forsooth,  one  of  the  two  sacraments  that 
are  generally  necessary  to  salvation.  I  can  comprehend  how  in 
some  countries  bread  and  wine  are  necessary  to  sustain  animal 
life,  but  I  believe  our  Saviour's  thoughts  ranged  somewhat  h'gh'jr, 
and  that  He  had,  as  Creator,  furnished  us  with  a  good  supi  y  of 
both  nearly  6,000  years  ago.  Anyhow,  the  practical  conclusion 
is,  that  if  the  moral  police  commissioners  yclept  the  church  of 
England,  meant  by  the  Lord's  supper  a  piece  of  baker's  bread 
and  a  few  drops  of  vintner's  wine,  then  I  can  say  "  thank  you  for 
nothing ;"  but  if  the  Sphynx  could  be  compelled  to  speak  intel- 
ligibly, and  pronounce  the  gift  unequivocally  the  body  and  blood 
of  the  Lord,  then,  I  say  too,  "  thank  you  for  nothing,"  for  you 
are  no  more,  commissioned  by  God  to  consecrate  the  elements 
than  I  am  to  superintend  the  motions  of  the  spheres,  and  my 
argument  on  the  apostolic  succession  leaves  this  beyond  perad- 
venture. 

And  now  let  me  make  a  few  observations  on  the  last  sad  rem- 
nant of  the  Redeemer's  costly  gifts  to  men.  Ah  !  what  a  spiritual 
charnel-house  Is  this  !  Did  not  your  Baltimore  convention  an- 
nounce, in  the  plenitude  of  its  wisdom,  that  it  was  not  prepared 
to  declare  that  any  moral  change  took  place  in  the  subject  of 
baptism,  by  the  ceremony  ?  of  this  I  am  well  assured  ;  and  if  so, 
that  is,  if  no  moral  change  takes  place,  then  baptism  is  a  sense- 
less rite,  a  farce,  and  the  sooner  you  rid  yourselves  of  it,  and 
with  it  the  last  shred  of  spiritual  life,  the  more  consistent  you 
will  be. 

But  let  me,  in  the  name  of  christian  charity,  implore  you,  for 
the  sake  of  the  little  children  whom  Jesus  desires  to  come  to 
Him,  to  beware  before  you  practically  carry  out  that  horrible 
decision.     If  you  have  any  faith  left  in  the  words  of  Jesus  Christ  j 


ADORATION    OF   THE   B.  V.   MAEY.  37 

if  you  value  in  the  least  degree  consistency,  do  not  let  the  dy^ng 
child  (for  you  are  authorized  to  do  this)  be  forever  deprived  of 
the  beatific  vision  by  any  such  nonsense  and  inconsistency. 

Open  your  book  of  prayer,  read  this  exhortation  at  the  begin- 
ning of  the  ministration  of  baptism  of  children,  and  cast  your 
eyes  on  the  first  w^ords:  "Dearly  beloved,  forasmuch  as  all  men 
are  conceived  and  born  in  sin  ;  and  our  Saviour  Christ  saith^  None 
can  enter  the  kingdom  of  heaven^  except  he  be  regenerate  and  born 
aneiu  of  water  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost. ''^  How,  I  ask,  could  any 
body  of  sane  men,  believing  the  words  of  Christ  and  the  inter- 
pretation of  being  "  regenerate  and  born  anew  of  water  and  the 
Holy  Ghost,"  rendered  in  that  very  exhortation.^  to  signify  bap- 
tism, declare  that  they  are  not  prepared  to  say  that  any  moral 
change  takes  place  through  baptism,  in  the  face  of  the  very 
words  of  Jesus  Christ  Himself  there  quoted  ?  Words  cannot 
express  the  depth  of  this  act  of  self-stultification;  and  the  same 
sapient  body  informed  the  christian  world,  too,  that  the  word 
"regenerate,"  used  so  frequently  in  that  ceremony,  ^^/^«(?  meaning, 
Alas  for  the  cause  that  necessity  forced  to  such  an  act  of  expediency 
as  this !  Words  fail  me  to  express  myself  worthily  of  the  occasion. 
^^^em  Deus  vult  perdere  prius  dementat^''  will  suffice.  Practi- 
cally, therefore,  the  only  one  left  of  all  the  sacraments. of  the 
primitive  church  instituted  by  Jesus  Christ,  is  robbed  of  its  effects 
and  consequently  of  the  necessity  of  receiving  it  ;  should  the 
poor  people  hearken  to  the  decision  of  the  Baltimore  convention 
rather  than  to  the  words  of  Jesus  Christ,  above  quoted,  and  in- 
terpreted by  your  prayer  book  ;  and  consequently,  what,  may  I 
ask,  of  spirituality  is  left  in  either  the  parent  or  daughter  institu- 
tion ?  Facts  and  arguments  collated  in  this  letter  have  irrefragi- 
bly  demonstrated  that  there  never  was  any  spirituality  therein, 
but  whilst  the  claim  is  made  for  divine  origin  (which  can  neve 
be  recognized),  the  suicidal  course  of  the  claimants,  renders  it 
unnecessary  to  prove  their  claim  groundless.  Should  the  de- 
scendants of  John  Jacob  Astor  prodigally  spend  the  last  dollar  of 
their  magnificent  estate,  and  in  their  folly  parade  Broadway, 
N.  Y.,  in  poverty  and  rags,  calling  public  attention  to  the  fact 
that  they  were  his  heirs,  their  situation  would  not  be  more  de- 
plorable than  that  of  the  church  of  England.  Heiress  to  all  the 
promises  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  in   the  full  enjoyment  of  all  the 


OQ  ADOKATION   OF   THE   B.   V.  MARY. 

blessings  of  Christianity  attainable  on  earth,  she  bartered  all  hei 
spiritual  gifts  for  a  mess  of  pottage,  and  apostatizing  and  deliber- 
ately renouncing  her  birth-right,  she  preserves  a  false  existence, 
supported  by  the  remnant  of  the  pilfered  property  of  the  mother 
church  -y  but  how  long  this  galvanized  existence  will  last  depends 
entirelv  upon  the  political  exigencies  of  the  government.  Wise 
men  limit  her  existence  to  less  than  ten  years. 

Her  children  are  to-day  without  a  single  christian  sacrament, 
and  consequently  without  a  single  grace  derivable  from  them, 
except  what  they  happen  to  secure  from  baptism  when  validly 
administered,  and  even  this  is  despite  hers  and  her  daughter's  de- 
cisions. A  more  melancholy  picture  of  the  spiritual  destitution 
of  a  nation  never  before  presented  itself. 

However,  it  is  a  consolation  to  feel  that  she  and  her  daughter 
form  a  branch  of  the  church  catholic,  and  call  themselves,  by 
every  right,  catholics  !  I  reply,  that  the  claim  is  inadmissible, 
for  man/  reasons,  ist.  The  term  catholicity  embodies  univer- 
sality, both  as  to  time  and  place.  Preposterous,  indeed,  is  the 
claim,  viewed  from  either  point.  As  to  time,  what  has  been  already- 
advanced  of  the  civil  institution  called  the  church  of  England, 
indicr.tes  the  year  1530  as  the  date  of  her  origin.  A  new  organ- 
ization iniigurated  by  the  English  monarch  that  year,  perfectly 
distinct  from  what  had  hitherto  existed,  in  every  element  consti- 
tutive of  autonomy,  took  root  in  British  soil  in  the  blood  of  thou- 
sands of  christians,  and  in  the  wholesale  and  indiscriminate  plun- 
der of  every  object  and  right  sacred  to  the  christian  citizen,  and 
in  th^  sacrilegious  assumption  of  spiritual  jurisdiction  by  laymen, 
— ^which  system  exists  to  this  day.  The  church  of  England, 
"  by  law  established,"  was  ushered  into  light  fifteen  centuries  too 
late,  therefore,  to  make  good  her  claim  to  the  title  catholic,  as  to 
time.  As  to  catholicity  of  place,  where,  I  ask,  does  she  enjoy 
an  exis.enc",  save  in  England,  where  she  is  fast  passing  away, 
and  in  her  r  presentation  in  this  country;  and  if  there  be  any 
truth  in  the  s'gns  of  the  times,  her  representatives  here  will  have 
good  reason  to  augur  "hard  times"  very  soon.  Nowhere  else  on 
the  earth  can  she  be  considered  as  having  any  tangible  representa- 
tion. And  were  her  claim  to  the  title  "  catholic  "  to  present 
itself  in  any  practical  shape,  let  me  ask,  what  body  of  christians 
would  admit  her  right  to  the  title  ?    The  christian  world,  as  repre- 


ADORATION    OF    THE    B.   V.    MARY.  gg 

sented  by  the  Roman  catholic  and  Greek  churches,  have  never  for  a 
moment  of  her  existence,  recognized  her ;  and  although  she  has 
sat  crouching  for  the  past  half  century  at  the  gates  of  the  schis- 
matical  Greek  church,  imploring  one  faint  smile  of  recognition, 
her  patience  and  humiliation  have  not  been  rewarded,  the  smile 
of  recognition  has  never  yet  been  vouchsafed  her.  She  stands 
alone,  even  in  the  midst  of  her  protectant  sisters,  assuming  a 
superiority  over  them  by  virtue  of  her  so-called  apostolic  suc- 
cession— a  monomania  that  seems  to  have  taken  possession  of 
her — u^hich  was  never  admitted  by  the  great  body  of  christians. 
Another  fond  delusion  I  will  now  notice.  I  will  present  it  in 
the  language  of  one  of  her  own  divines  :  "  The  church  is,  as  it 
were,  a  tree.  For  eight  feet  above  the  soil,  its  trunk  stands  one 
and  entire.  Somewhere  along  the  ninth  foot,  the  trunk  branches 
into  two  main  limbs.  We  will  call  the  eastern  the  Greek  limb, 
and  the  western  the  Latin.  Six  feet  further  out  on  the  Latin 
limb,  that  is  to  say,  fifteen  feet  from  the  ground,  that  western 
limb  subdivides  into  two  vast  branches.  The  outmost  we  will 
call  the  Anglican  branch,  the  other  Ave  will  call  the  Roman. 
These  two  branches  and  the  Greek  limb  run  up  to  a  height  of 
nineteen  and  a-half  feet  from  the  ground.  There  they  are  the 
three  great  boughs,  each  with  its  foliage,  Anglican  at  the  west, 
Roman  in  the  centre,  Greek  at  the  east."  Behold  the  branch 
system,  which  furnishes  so  much  consolation  to  our  imaginative 
friends,  fully  developed  !  Alas,  however,  for  its  advocates,  it 
lacks  one  very  necessary  ingredient,  viz.,  its  failure  to  be  true  to 
nature.  The  figure  of  a  tree  is  a  very  simple  and  natural  figure, 
and  provided  it  be  carried  out  distinctly  and  applied  successfully 
(our  Saviour  adopted  it  frequently  and  applied  it  beautifully)  is 
very  available.  Let  us  analyze  our  favorite  figure.  The  root 
is,  of  course,  Jesus  Christ  j  the  trunk,  which  was  eight  feet  high 
before  it  threw  out  a  limb,  was  the  church  of  eight  centuries' 
growth.  The  Latin  limb  grew  six  feet  long  from  the  trunk,  and 
then  threw  out  two  branches,  viz.:  the  Anglican  and  Roman, 
which,  with  the  Greek,  has  been  growing  apace,  and  luxuria- 
ting in  the  densest  foliage  ever  since  their  separation.  But  I  fear 
I  am  about  to  destroy  (figuratively)  this  very  unnatural  tree. 
Where,  may  I  ask,  is  the  trunk  that,  planted  in  Jesus  Christ,  the 
root,  flourished  so  vigorously  for  eight  full  centuries,  without  a 


AQ  ADORATION    OF    THE  B.  V.MARY. 

branch,  and  what  has  become  of  the  Latin  branch,  that  flour- 
ished in  company  with  the  Greek  branch  for  six  centuries  ? 
They  exist  nowhere  in  our  pretty  figure,  because  they  have  no 
representation  in  Christianity  on  the  earth,  nor  have  they  had, 
according  to  the  figure,  for  the  past  three  centuries.  Therefore 
we  have  presented  to  our  contemplation,  a  great  unnatural  curi- 
osity, which  would  be. another  fortune  to  Barnum,  if  he  could 
succeed  in  taking  hold  of  it.  We  have,  in  a  word,  three  branches 
dense  with  foliage,  all  perfectly  distinct  from  each  other,  with  no 
trunk  to  furnish  them  with  life  and  vigor  from  the  root.  This 
is  certainly  a  prodigy.  Talk  of  the  age  of  miracles  having  passed 
away.  Why,  the  most  inveterate  antagonists  of  miracles,  are 
those  who  have,  for  three  centuries,  been  furnishing  us  with  the 
most  astounding  of  all.  But  their  natural  modesty,  combined 
with  papistical  stupidity,  has  prevented  the  world  hitherto  from 
admiring  the  great  unnatural  curiosity. 

Reverend  sir,  you  may  rest  assured  that  the  Redeemer  never 
planted  such  a  tree  as  that  whose  trunk  He  nourished  for  eight 
centuries,  but  then  allowed  to  decay  and  be  lost,  whilst  He  nur- 
tured the  branches  in  the  air,  perfectly  detached  from  Himself 
(the  root),  and  from  any  trunk.  That  is  expecting  rather  too 
much.  But  He  did  plant  a  tree  that  has  stood  the  storms  of 
nearly  nineteen  centuries,  whose  branches  extend,  and  have  ex- 
tended all  over  the  earth  for  ages,  which  branches  are  all  in  inti- 
mate conjunction  with  the  trunk,  ever  receiving  life  and  vigor 
from  the  root,  Jesus  Christ,  and  ever  dispensing  that  vigor  and 
life  to -its  most  distant  branches.  True  it  is  that  a  number  of 
branches  have,  through  their  own  fault,  dropped  off  from  the 
trunk  and  rotted  where  they  dropped  (count  the  heresies  of  the 
first  ages),  and  that  some  have  dropped  off  within  the  past  500 
years,  /.  ^.,  the  Greek  and  Anglican  branches,  and  their  fate  is 
as  unmistakable  as  the  fate  of  those  already  long  defunct.  A 
new  branch,  however,  has  not  only  budded  out  where  the  Ang- 
lican branch  dropped  from,  but  is  assuming  proportions  that 
authorize  the  assurance  that  it  will  ere  long  transcend  the  decay- 
ing one.  Such  is  the  promise  from  its  present  development  and 
wonderful  vigor  and  vitality. 

Having,  reverend  sir,  vindicated  my  religion  from  the  unjust 
and  gratuitous  aspersions  which  you  thought  well  of  heaping  upon 


ADORATION   OF   THE   B.  V.  MARY.  4;j 

her ;  having  adduced  the  most  ample  testimony  that  the  church 
of  the  primitive  ages  exceeded  the  church  of  this  day  in  language 
far  more  eulogistic  than  ourselves  in  reference  to  the  Blessed 
Virgiji ;  and  this  in  contradiction  of  your  statement  that  the  early 
fathers  were  all  silent  on  this  subject. 

Having  repelled  vs^ith  just  indignation  each  and  every  assertion 
and  inference  sought  to  be  deduced  from  premises  that  vi^ere 
gratuitously  assumed,  and  from  facts  that  had  no  existence,  save 
in  minds  that  derive  their  pabulum  from  inventions  and  calum- 
nies uttered  against  the  church  of  Christ,  and  in  this  respect 
they  are  by  no  means  particular  as  to  the  quality  or  quantity  pre- 
sented them  ;  so  morbid  is  the  appetite  for  this  species  of  food. 

Having,  in  the  second  part  of  my  letter,  begun  by  paying  my 
respects  to  your  rule  of  faith,  and  having  invited  you  to  apply  to 
your  sect  every  argument  made  use  of  by  me  in  my  controversy 
with  Dr.  Blackwell  (for  there  is  not  a  pin's  point  of  difference 
between  the  sects  in  this  particular) ;  having  demonstrated  that 
the  source  whence  you  derive  your  existence  never  had  a  spark 
of  spiritual  vitality  (I  mean  the  church  of  England),  but  con- 
tinues to  live  a  pampered  life  on  the  ill-gotten  goods  of  that 
branch  of  the  church  of  Christ  which  luxuriated  for  centuries  in 
the  enjoyment  of  countless  spiritual  blessings  derived  from  its 
connection  with  Jesus  Christ  through  the  one  church  existing, 
viz. :  the  holy  Roman  catholic  church;  having,  too,  demonstrated 
the  utter  futility  of  seeking  to  vindicate  for  yourselves  the  apos- 
tolic succession,  which,  even  if  possessed  by  you,  has  not  whereon 
to  exercise  such  orders  ;  you  having  suicidally  rejected  five  of  the 
sacraments  and  so  razeed  the  two  remaining  that,  of  their  own 
weight,  having  no  buoyancy,  or  rather  being  so  completely  sub- 
merged, they  are  no  longer  visible  to  the  eyes  of  men — leaving 
.you  completely  deprived  of  any  "  mysteries  of  God,"  even  had 
you  the  power  "  to  dispense"  them.  Moreover,  having  shown 
how  abortive  is  the  effort  on  your  part  to  obtain  from  the  catho- 
lic church,  the  Greek  church,  or  any  other  schismatical  body  in 
existence,  a  nod  of  recognition,  and  having,  in  fine,  exposed  the 
fond  delusion  of  the  "  branch"  theory  that  seems  to  afford  so 
much  comfort  to  your  sect,  to  the  prejudice  and  utter  ignoring 
of  your  other  protestant  co-religionists,  I  now  beg  leave  to  close 
this  letter,  requiring,  in  justice  to  the  millions  of  christians  ^t- 


42  ADORATION   OF  THE   B.  V.   MARY. 

tered  over  the  earth,  either  the  proofs  of  what,  I  repeat,  is  an 
unmitigated  calumny  reproduced  by  yourself  before  a  number  of 
my  fellow-citizens,  or  in  failure  thereof,  an  honest  and  manly 
apology  to  the  great  body  of  christians,  before  that  same  audience ; 
for  less  than  that  will  not  satisfy  justice.  As  for  my  pirt,  I  hold 
myself  in  readiness  to  defend  the  teachings  of  my  religion  against 
all  attacks  thereon,  and  shall  have  recourse  to  all  honorable  means 
to  refute  what  I  know  to  be  misstatements  and  misrepresentations 
of  her  doctrine. 

Prepared  to  enter  the  lists  with  you,  should  you  see  fit  to  main- 
tain your  position,  as  indicated  by  your  notes,  for  the  further 
development  of  the  question — for  the  tighter  the  coat  fits  (theo- 
logically) the  better  I  like  it — or  to  hear  from  you  a  retraction 
of  the  above  summarized  slanders,  which  I  will  do  you  the  justice 
to  believe  you  have,  without  examination,  appropriated  and  ven- 
tilated. 

I  am,  reTeread  eir,  jours  trulj, 

M.  O'KEEFE. 


U.C.  BERKELEY  LIBRARIES 


(i^S^ 


^JC.  ^ 


t 


